Abstract
The study was focused on morphokynetic characteristics of in vitro cultured human embryos that were considered to be aneuploid or euploid according to the preimplantation genetic screening results. Among all the embryos examined, only 34.2% were chromosomally balanced. Although morphological features of cleaving pathologic and euploid embryos did not differ significantly, on the fifth day of culture, a chromosomally balanced specimen formed an “expanded” blastocyst twice more frequently than abnormal ones. Moreover, development of 38.4% of aneuploid embryos was compromised before the initiation of cavitation. Thus, prolonged embryo culture advances selection of samples with the highest implantation potential for the transfer on the basis of the morphokynetic characteristics and helps to avoid additional genetic testing.
Article PDF
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
References
Niakan, K.K., Han, J., Pedersen, R.A., et al., Human pre-implantation embryo development, Development, 2012, vol. 139, no. 5, pp. 829–841.
Joffe, M., What has happened to human fertility?, Hum. Reprod., 2010, vol. 25, no. 2, pp. 295–307.
Munne, S., Preimplantation genetic diagnosis and human implantation a review, Placenta, 2003, vol. 24, pp. 70–S76.
Pagidas, K., Ying, Y., and Keefe, D., Predictive value of preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidy screening in repeated IVF-ET cycles among women with recurrent implantation failure, J. Assist. Reprod. Genet., 2008, vol. 25, nos. 2/3, pp. 103–106.
Brezina, P.R., Preimplantation genetic testing in the 21st century: uncharted territory, Clin. Med. Insights Reprod. Health, 2013, vol. 7, pp. 17–21.
Magli, M.C., Jones, G.M., Gras, L., et al., Chromosome mosaicism in day 3 aneuploid embryos that develop to morphologically normal blastocysts in vitro, Hum. Reprod., 2000, vol. 15, pp. 1781–1786.
Yamamoto, M., Ito, T., Watanabe, M., and Watanabe, G., Estimated prevalence of chromosome anomalies in the first trimester of the Japanese pregnant population, Tohoku J. Exp. Med., 1981, vol. 135, no. 1, pp. 109–113.
Spencer, K., Aneuploidy screening in the first trimester, Am. J. Med. Genet., 2007, vol. 145C, pp. 18–32.
Ahlstrom, A., Westin, C., Reismer, E., et al., Trophectoderm morphology: an important parameter for predicting live birth after single blastocyst transfer, Hum. Reprod., 2011, vol. 26, no. 12, pp. 3289–3296.
De Mouzon, J., Goossens, V., Bhattacharya, S., et al., Assisted reproductive technology in Europe, 2006: results generated from European registers by ESHRE, Hum. Reprod., 2010, vol. 25, pp. 1851–1862.
Capalbo, A., Bono, S., Spizzichino, L., et al., Sequential comprehensive chromosome analysis on polar bodies, blastomeres and trophoblast: insights into female meiotic errors and chromosomal segregation in the preimplantation window of embryo development, Hum. Reprod., 2013, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 509–518.
Kuliev, A., Cieslak, J., and Verlinsky, Y., Frequency and distribution of chromosome abnormalities in human oocytes, Cytogenet. Genome Res., 2005, vol. 111, nos. 3/4, pp. 193–198.
Rubio, C., Simon, C., Vidal, F., et al., Chromosomal abnormalities and embryo development in recurrent miscarriage couples, Hum. Reprod., 2003, vol. 18, no. 1, pp. 182–188.
Munne, S., Bahce, M., Sandalinas, M., et al., Differences in chromosome susceptibility to aneuploidy and survival to first trimester, Reprod. Biomed. Online, 2004, vol. 8, no. 1, pp. 81–90.
Thornhill, A.R., de Die-Smulders, C.E., Geraedts, J.P., et al., ESHRE PGD Consortium ‘Best practice guidelines for clinical preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) and preimplantation genetic screening (PGS)’, Hum. Reprod., 2005, vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 35–48.
Tao, J., Craig, R.H., Johnson, M., et al., Cryopreservation of human embryos at the morula stage and outcomes after transfer, Fertil. Steril., 2004, vol. 82, no. 1, pp. 108–118.
Gardner, D.K. and Schoolcraft, W.B., In vitro culture of human blastocysts, in Toward Reproductive Certainty: Fertility and Genetics Beyond, Carnforth: Parth. Publ., 1999.
Munne, S., Marquez, C., Magli, C., et al., Scoring criteria for preimplantation genetic diagnosis of numerical abnormalities for chromosomes X, Y, 13, 16, 18 and 21, Mol. Hum. Reprod., 1998, vol. 4, no. 9, pp. 863–870.
Blockeel, C., Schutyser, V., De Vos, A., et al., Prospectively randomized controlled trial of PGS in IVF/ICSI patients with poor implantation, Reprod. Biomed. Online, 2008, vol. 17, no. 6, pp. 848–854.
De Vos, A., Staessen, C., De Rycke, M., et al., Impact of cleavage-stage embryo biopsy in view of PGD on human blastocyst implantation: a prospective cohort of single embryo transfers, Hum. Reprod., 2009, vol. 24, pp. 2988–2996.
Scott, L., Finn, A., O’Leary, T., et al., Morphologic parameters of early cleavage-stage embryos that correlate with fetal development and delivery: prospective and applied data for increased pregnancy rates, Hum. Reprod., 2007, vol. 22, pp. 230–240.
Holte, J., Berglund, L., Milton, K., et al., Construction of an evidence-based integrated morphology cleavage embryo score for implantation potential of embryos scored and transferred on day 2 after oocyte retrieval, Hum. Reprod., 2007, vol. 22, pp. 548–557.
Hourvitz, A., Lerner-Geva, L., Elizur, S.A., et al., Role of embryo quality in predicting early pregnancy loss following assisted reproductive technology, Reprod. Biomed. Online, 2006, vol. 13, pp. 504–509.
Racowsky, C., Stern, J.E., Gibbons, W.E., et al., National collection of embryo morphology data into society for assisted reproductive technology clinic outcomes reporting system: associations among day 3 cell number, fragmentation and blastomere asymmetry, and live birth rate, Fertil. Steril., 2011, vol. 95, pp. 1985–1989.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Original Ukrainian Text © O.V. Chaplia, J.V. Gontar, N.M. Bilko, 2015, published in Tsitologiya i Genetika, 2015, Vol. 49, No. 4, pp. 51–60.
About this article
Cite this article
Chaplia, O.V., Gontar, J.V. & Bilko, N.M. Preimplantation development of human embryos with numerical chromosome abnormalities in vitro. Cytol. Genet. 49, 254–261 (2015). https://doi.org/10.3103/S0095452715040039
Received:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3103/S0095452715040039