Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics
Published in: Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 8/2012

01-08-2012 | Genetics

Preimplantation genetic diagnosis for chromosome rearrangements – one blastomere biopsy versus two blastomere biopsy

Authors: D. Brodie, C. E. Beyer, E. Osborne, V. Kralevski, S. Rasi, T. Osianlis

Published in: Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics | Issue 8/2012

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD) has proven to be a useful reproductive option for carriers of some chromosome rearrangements. The data presented in this study compares the impact of one versus two blastomere biopsy on the likelihood of achieving a PGD result, as well as the effect on subsequent embryo development and clinical outcomes.

Methods

IVF-PGD couples had either one or two blastomeres biopsied from all embryos with ≥7 blastomeres on day 3 post oocyte collection. These blastomeres were assessed for the specific chromosome rearrangement using Fluorescent In-situ Hybridisation (FISH). Further embryo development was monitored on days 4 and 5. Clinical outcomes were assessed retrospectively.

Results

The data shows that statistically more embryos achieved a PGD result following two blastomere biopsy, compared with one blastomere biopsy (92 % versus 88 %, respectively). Furthermore it was found that embryo development and clinical outcomes were similar between the two biopsy groups.

Conclusions

Based on this analysis it appears that the biopsy of two blastomeres from embryos with ≥7 blastomeres on day 3 is a valid and successful approach for couples presenting for IVF-PGD for a chromosome rearrangement.
Literature
1.
Baart EB, Van Opstal D, Los FJ, Fauser BCJM, Martini E. Fluorescence in situ hybridization analysis of two blastomeres from day 3 frozen-thawed embryos followed by analysis of the remaining embryo on day 5. Hum Reprod. 2004;19:685–93.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Beyer CE, Osianlis T, Boekel K, Osborne E, Rombauts L, Catt J, Kralevski V, Aali BS, Gras L. Preimplantation genetic screening outcomes are associated with culture conditions. Hum Reprod. 2009;24:1212–20.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Cohen J, Wells D, Munne S. Removal of 2 cells from cleavage stage embryos is likely to reduce the efficacy of chromosomal tests that are used to enhance implantation rates. Fertil Steril. 2007;87:496–503.PubMedCrossRef
4.
De Vos A, Staessen C, De Rycke M, Verpoest W, Haentjens P, Devroey P, Liebaers I, Van de Velde H. Impact of cleavage-stage embryo biopsy in view of PGD on human blastocyst implantation: a prospective cohort of single embryo transfers. Hum Reprod. 2009;24:2988–96.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Emiliani S, Gonzalez-Merino E, Van den Bergh M, Delneste D, Englert Y, Abramowicz M. Correlation between fluorescence in-situ hybridization analyses and in-vitro development to blastocyst stage of embryos from Robertsonian translocation (13;14) carriers. Hum Reprod. 2002;17:2957–62.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Goossens V, De Rycke M, De Vos A, Staessen C, Michiels A, Verpoest W, Van Steirteghem A, Bertrand C, Liebaers I, Devroey P, Sermon K. Diagnostic efficiency, embryo development and clinical outcome after the biopsy of one or two blastomeres for preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Hum Reprod. 2007;23:481–92.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Harper JC, Coonen E, De Rycke M, Harton G, Moutou C, Pehlivan T, Traeger-Synodinos J, Van Rij M, Goossens V. ESHRE PGD consortium data collection X: cycles from January to December 2007 with pregnancy follow-up to October 2008. Hum Reprod. 2010;25:2685–707.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Harton GL, Magli MC, Lundin K, Montag M, Lemmen J, Harper JC. ESHRE PGD Consortium/Embryology Special Interest Group – best practice guidelines for polar body and embryo biopsy for preimplanation genetic diagnosis/screening (PGD/PGS). Hum Reprod. 2010;0:1–6.
9.
Michiels A, Van Assche E, Liebaers I, Van Steirteghem A, Staessen C. The analysis of one or two blastomeres for PGD using fluorescence in-situ hybridisatiion. Hum Reprod. 2006;21:2396–402.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Munne S, Marquez C, Magli C, Morton P, Morrison L. Scoring criteria for preimplantation genetic diagnosis of numerical abnormalities for chromosomes X, Y, 13, 16, 18 and 21. Mol Hum Reprod. 1998;4:863–70.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Sandalinas M, Sadowy S, Alikani M, Calderon G, Cohen J, Munne S. Developmental ability of chromosomally abnormal human embryos to develop to the blastocyst stage. Hum Reprod. 2001;16:1954–8.
12.
The Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis International Society (PGDIS). Guidelines for good practice in PGD: programme requirements and laboratory quality assurance. RBM Online. 2008;16:134–47.CrossRef
13.
Van de Velde H, De Vos A, Sermon K, Staessen C, De Rycke M, Van Assche E, Lissens W, Vandervorst M, Van Ranst H, Liebaers I, Van Steirteghem A. Embryo implantation after biopsy of one or two cells from cleavage-stage embryos with a view to preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Prenat Diagn. 2000;20:1030–7.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Velilla E, Escudero T, Munne S. Blastomere fixation techniques and risk of misdiagnosis for preimplantation genetic diagnosis of aneuploidy. Reprod BioMed Online. 2002;4:210–7.PubMedCrossRef
Metadata
Title
Preimplantation genetic diagnosis for chromosome rearrangements – one blastomere biopsy versus two blastomere biopsy
Authors
D. Brodie
C. E. Beyer
E. Osborne
V. Kralevski
S. Rasi
T. Osianlis
Publication date
01-08-2012
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics / Issue 8/2012
Print ISSN: 1058-0468
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7330
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-012-9782-2

Other articles of this Issue 8/2012

Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 8/2012 Go to the issue

Gamete Biology

Influence of microsurgical varicocelectomy on human sperm mitochondrial DNA copy number: a pilot study

Gonadal Physiology and Disease

Phthalates and bisphenol do not accumulate in human follicular fluid

ASSISTED REPRODUCTION TECHNOLOGIES

Influence of post-thaw culture on the developmental potential of human frozen embryos

Genetics

Characteristics of chromosomal abnormalities diagnosed after spontaneous abortions in an infertile population

REVIEW

Leiomyoma: genetics, assisted reproduction, pregnancy and therapeutic advances

Technical Innovations

Secretome profile of mouse oocytes after activation using mass spectrum