Top

Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics

Published in:

Open Access 01-04-2017 | Assisted Reproduction Technologies

The accumulation of vitrified oocytes is a strategy to increase the number of euploid available blastocysts for transfer after preimplantation genetic testing

Authors: Sandrine Chamayou, Maria Sicali, Carmelita Alecci, Carmen Ragolia, Annalisa Liprino, Daniela Nibali, Giorgia Storaci, Antonietta Cardea, Antonino Guglielmino

Published in: Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics | Issue 4/2017

Abstract

Purpose

In a preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidy (PGD-A) program, the more embryos available for biopsy, consequently increases the chances of obtaining euploid embryos to transfer. The aim was to increase the number of viable euploid blastocysts in patients undergoing PGD-A using fresh oocytes together with previously accumulated vitrified oocytes.

Methods

Sixty-nine patients with normal ovarian reserve underwent PGD-A for repeated implantation failure or recurrent pregnancy loss indication. After several cycles of ovarian stimulation, 591 accumulated vitrified oocytes and 463 fresh oocytes were micro-injected with the same partner’s semen sample. PGD-A was completed on 134 blastocysts from vitrified/warmed oocytes and 130 blastocysts from fresh oocytes.

Results

A mean of 9.6% euploid blastocyst per micro-injected vitrified/warmed oocytes and 11.4% euploid blastocyst per micro-injected fresh oocyte were obtained (p > 0.05). The euploidy and aneuploidy rates were comparable in blastocysts obtained from micro-injected vitrified/warmed oocytes and fresh oocytes (42.5 versus 40.8% and 57.5 versus 59.2%, p > 0.05). Implantation rates of euploid blastocysts were comparable between the two sources of oocytes (56.0% from vitrified/warmed oocytes versus 60.9% from fresh oocytes, p > 0.05).

Conclusions

Oocyte vitrification and warming do not generate aneuploidy in blastocysts. The number of viable euploid embryos for transfer can be increased by using accumulated vitrified oocytes together with fresh oocytes in ICSI.

Trial registration

NCT02820415 ClinicalTrials.gov

Franasiak M, Forman EJ, Hong KH, Werner MD, Upham KM, Treff NR, et al. The nature of aneuploidy with increasing age of the female partner: a review of 15,169 consecutive trophectoderm biopsies evaluated with comprehensive chromosomal screening. Fertil Steril. 2014;101(3):656–63.CrossRefPubMed

Moutou C, Goossens V, Coonen E, De Rycke M, Kokkali G, Renwick P, et al. Traeger-Synodinos J.ESHRE PGD Consortium data collection XII: cycles from January to December 2009 with pregnancy follow-up to October 2010. Hum Reprod. 2014;29(5):880–903.CrossRefPubMed

Mastenbroek S, Twisk M, van Echten-Arends J, Sikkema-Raddatz B, Korevaar JC, Verhoeve HR, et al. In vitro fertilization with preimplantation genetic screening. N Engl J Med. 2007;357(1):9–17.CrossRefPubMed

Harper J, Coonen E, De Rycke M, Fiorentino F, Geraedts J, Goossens V, et al. What next for preimplantation genetic screening (PGS)? A position statement from the ESHRE PGD Consortium Steering Committee. Hum Reprod. 2010;25(4):821–3.CrossRefPubMed

Scott Jr RT, Upham KM, Forman EJ, Zhao T, Treff NR. Cleavage-stage biopsy significantly impairs human embryonic implantation potential while blastocyst biopsy does not: a randomized and paired clinical trial. Fertil Steril. 2013;100(3):624–30.CrossRefPubMed

Vanneste E, Voet T, Le Caignec C, Ampe M, Konings P, Melotte C, et al. Chromosome instability is common in human cleavage-stage embryos. Nat Med. 2009;15(5):577–83.CrossRefPubMed

Fragouli E, Alfarawati S, Spath K, Jaroudi S, Sarasa J, Enciso M, et al. The origin and impact of embryonic aneuploidy. Hum Genet. 2013;132:1001–13.CrossRefPubMed

Handyside AH. 24-chromosome copy number analysis: a comparison of availabletechnologies. Fertil Steril. 2013;100(3):595–602.CrossRefPubMed

Handyside AH, Harton GL, Mariani B, Thornhill AR, Affara N, Shaw MA, et al. Karyomapping: a universal method for genome wide analysis of genetic disease based on mapping crossovers between parental haplotypes. J Med Genet. 2010;47(10):651–8.CrossRefPubMed

10.

Johnson DS, Cinnioglu C, Ross R, Filby A, Gemelos G, Hill M, et al. Comprehensive analysis of karyotypic mosaicism between trophectoderm and inner cell mass. Mol Hum Reprod. 2010;16(12):944–9.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

11.

Treff NR, Tao X, Ferry KM, Su J, Taylor D, Scott RT. Development and validation of an accurate quantitative real-time polymerase chain reaction-based assay for human blastocyst comprehensive chromosomal aneuploidy screening. Fertil Steril. 2012;97(4):819–24.CrossRefPubMed

12.

Wells D, Kaur K, Grifo J, Glassner M, Taylor JC, Fragouli E, et al. Clinical utilisation of a rapid low-pass whole genome sequencing technique for the diagnosis of aneuploidy in human embryos prior to implantation. J Med Genet. 2014;51(8):553–62.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

13.

Fiorentino F, Bono S, Biricik A, Nuccitelli A, Cotroneo E, Cottone G, et al. Application of next-generation sequencing technology for comprehensive aneuploidy screening of blastocysts in clinical preimplantation genetic screening cycles. Hum Reprod. 2014;29(12):2802–13.CrossRefPubMed

14.

Ata B, Kaplan B, Danzer H, Glassner M, Opsahl M, Tan SL, et al. Array CGH analysis shows that aneuploidy is not related to the number of embryos generated. Reprod BioMed Online. 2012;24:614–20.CrossRefPubMed

15.

Parlamento Italiano. Legge n.40: Norme in material di procreazione medicalmente assistita. Gazzetta ufficiale, n.45 del 24 febbraio. 2004.

16.

Practice Committees of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine and the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. Mature oocyte cryopreservation: a guideline. Fertil Steril. 2013;99(1):37–43.CrossRef

17.

Kuwayama M, Vatja G, Kato O, Leibo SP. Highly efficient vitrification method for cryopreservation of human oocytes. Reprod BioMed Online. 2005;11(3):300–8.CrossRefPubMed

18.

Chamayou S, Bonaventura G, Alecci C, Tibullo D, Di Raimondo F, Guglielmino A, et al. Consequences of metaphase II oocyte cryopreservation on mRNA content. Cryobiology. 2011;62:130–4.CrossRefPubMed

19.

Chamayou S, Romano S, Alecci C, Storaci G, Ragolia C, Palagiano A, et al. Oocyte vitrification modifies nucleolar remodeling and zygote kinetic-a sibling study. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2015;32:581–6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

20.

Coughlan C, Ledger W, Wnag Q, Liu F, Demirol A, Gurgan T, et al. Recurrent implantation failure: a definition and management. Reprod BioMed Online. 2014;28:14–38.CrossRefPubMed

21.

Practice Committees of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine and Practice Committee for the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. Definitions of infertility and recurrent pregnancy loss: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2012;99(1):63.

22.

Chamayou S, Alecci C, Ragolia C, Storaci G, Maglia E, Russo E, et al. Comparison of in-vitro outcomes from cryopreserved oocytes and sibling fresh oocytes. Reprod BioMed Online. 2006;12(6):730–6.CrossRefPubMed

23.

Chamayou S, Patrizio P, Storaci G, Tomaselli V, Alecci C, Ragolia C, et al. The use of morphokinetic parameters to select all embryos with full capacity to implant. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2013;30:703–10.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

24.

Alpha Scientists in Reproductive Medicine and ESHRE Special Interest Group of Embryology. The Istanbul consensus workshop on embryo assessment: proceedings of an expert meeting. Hum Reprod. 2011;26(6):1270–83.CrossRef

25.

Kuwayama M. Highly efficient vitrification for cryopreservation of human oocytes and embryos: the Cryotop method. Theriogenology. 2007;67:73–80.CrossRefPubMed

26.

Milàn M, Cobo AC, Rodrigo L, Mateu E, Mercader A, Buendìa P, et al. Redifining advanced maternal age as an indication for preimplantation genetic screening. Reprod BioMed Online. 2010;21:649–57.CrossRefPubMed

27.

Cobo A, Garrido N, Crespo J, Josè R, Pellicer A. Accumulation of oocytes: a new strategy for managing low-responder patients. Reprod BioMed Online. 2012;24:424–32.CrossRefPubMed

28.

Forman EJ, Li X, Ferry KM, Scott K, Treff N, Scott RT. Oocyte vitrification does not increase the risk of embryonic aneuploidy or diminish the implantation potential of blastocysts created after intracytoplasmic sperm injection: a novel, paired randomized controlled trial using DNA fingerprinting. Fertil Steril. 2012;98(3):644–9.CrossRefPubMed

29.

Grifo J, Adler A, Lee HL, Morin SJ, Smith M, Lu L, et al. Deliveries from trofectoderm biopsied, fresh and vitrified blastocysts derived from polar body biopsied, vitrified oocytes. Reprod BioMed Online. 2015;31:210–6.CrossRefPubMed

30.

Greco E, Biricik A, Cotarelo RP, Iammarone E, Rubino P, Tesarik J, et al. Successful implantation and live birth of a healthy by after triple biopsy and double vitrification of oocyte-embryo-blastocyst. Spinger Plus. 2015;4:22.CrossRef

31.

Orris JJ, Taylor TH, Gilchrist JW, Hallowell SV, Glassner MJ, Wininger D. The utility of embryo banking in order to increase the number of embryos available for preimplantation genetic screening in advanced maternal age patients. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2010;27:729–33.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

32.

Repubblica Italiana. Sentenza n. 151/2009 della Corte Costituzionale.

33.

Scott RT, Gagliano D. The challenge of embryonic mosaicism in preimplantation genetic screening. Fertil Steril. 2016;105(35):1150–2.CrossRefPubMed

34.

Geicher N, Vidali A, Braverman J, Kushnir VA, Barad DH, Hudson C, et al. Accuracy of preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) is compromised by degree of mosaicism of human embryos. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2016;14:54.CrossRef

35.

Dahdouh E, Balayla J, Garcia-Velasco JA. Comprehensive chromosome screening improves embryo selection: a meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2015;104(6):1503–12.CrossRefPubMed

36.

Lee E, Illingworth P, Wilton L, Chambers GM. The clinical effectiveness of preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidy in all 24 chromosomes (PGD-A): systematic review. Hum Reprod. 2015;30(2):473–83.CrossRefPubMed

37.

Kushnir VA, Darmon SK, Albertini DF, Barad DH, Gleicher N. Effectiveness of in vitro fertilization with preimplantation genetic screening: a reanalysis of United Stated assisted reproductive technology data 2011-2012. Fertil Steril. 2016;106:75–9.CrossRefPubMed

38.

Ou J, Wang W, Feng T, Liao L, Meng Q, Zou Q, et al. Identification of small segmental translocations in patients with repeated implantation failure and recurrent miscarriage using next generation sequencing after in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Mol Cytogenet. 2015;8:105.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral

39.

Fragouli E, Spath K, Alfarawati S, Kaper F, Craig A, Michel CR, et al. Altered levels of mitochondrial DNA are associated with female age, aneuploidy, and provide an independent measure of embryonic implantation potential. Plos Genet. 2015. doi:10.1371/journal.pgen.1005241.PubMedPubMedCentral

40.

Taylor TH, Gitlin SA, Patrick JL, Crain JL, Wilson JM, Griffin DK. The origin, mechanisms, incidence and clinical consequences of chromosomal mosaicism in humans. Hum Reprod Update. 2014;20(4):571–81.CrossRefPubMed

41.

Greco E, Minasi MG. Fiorentino. healthy babies after intrauterine transfer of mosaic aneuploid blastocysts. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(21):2089–90.CrossRefPubMed

42.

Munné S, Grifo J, Wells D. Mosaicism: ‘survival of the fittest’ versus ‘no embryo left behind’. Fertil Steril. 2016;105(5):1146–9.CrossRefPubMed

43.

Fan J, Wang L, Ma M, Wang S, Liu Z, Xu G, et al. The clinical utility of next-generation sequencing for identifying chromosome disease syndromes in human embryos. Reprod BioMed Online. 2015;31:62–70.CrossRefPubMed

44.

Alpha Scientists In Reproductive Medicine. The Alpha consensus meeting on cryopreservation key performance indicators and benchmarks: proceeding of an expert meeting. Reprod BioMed Online. 2012;25:146–67.CrossRef

45.

Forman EJ, Hong KHH, Ferry KM, Tao X, Taylor D, Levy B, et al. In vitro fertilization with single euploid blastocyst transfer: a randomized controlled trial. Fertil Steril. 2013;100:100–7.CrossRefPubMed

Title: The accumulation of vitrified oocytes is a strategy to increase the number of euploid available blastocysts for transfer after preimplantation genetic testing
Authors: Sandrine Chamayou
Maria Sicali
Carmelita Alecci
Carmen Ragolia
Annalisa Liprino
Daniela Nibali
Giorgia Storaci
Antonietta Cardea
Antonino Guglielmino
Publication date: 01-04-2017
Publisher: Springer US
Published in: Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics / Issue 4/2017
Print ISSN: 1058-0468
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7330
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-016-0868-0

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

The accumulation of vitrified oocytes is a strategy to increase the number of euploid available blastocysts for transfer after preimplantation genetic testing

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Trial registration

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Purpose

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Trial registration

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 4/2017

Progesterone requires heat shock protein 90 (HSP90) in human sperm to regulate motility and acrosome reaction

Increased incidence of post-term delivery and Cesarean section after frozen-thawed embryo transfer during a hormone replacement cycle

Outcomes of medical malpractice claims in assisted reproductive technology over a 10-year period from a single carrier

Effect of GnRHa ovulation trigger dose on follicular fluid characteristics and granulosa cell gene expression profiles

Morbid obesity and pregnancy outcomes after single blastocyst transfer: a retrospective, North American study

Adiponectin and leptin gene polymorphisms in women with gestational diabetes mellitus