Literature DB >> 22552689

Further evidence that culture media affect perinatal outcome: findings after transfer of fresh and cryopreserved embryos.

Ewka C Nelissen1, Aafke P Van Montfoort, Edith Coonen, Josien G Derhaag, Joep P Geraedts, Luc J Smits, Jolande A Land, Johannes L Evers, John C Dumoulin.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: We have previously shown that the medium used for culturing IVF embryos affects the birthweight of the resulting newborns. This observation with potentially far-reaching clinical consequences during later life, was made in singletons conceived during the first IVF treatment cycle after the transfer of fresh embryos. In the present study, we hypothesize that in vitro culture of embryos during the first few days of preimplantation development affects perinatal outcome, not only in singletons conceived in all rank order cycles but also in twins and in children born after transfer of frozen embryos. Furthermore, we investigated the effect of culture medium on gestational age (GA) at birth.
METHODS: Oocytes and embryos from consecutive treatment cycles were alternately assigned to culture in either medium from Vitrolife or from Cook. Data on a cohort of 294 live born singletons conceived after fresh transfer during any of a patient's IVF treatment cycles, as well as data of 67 singletons conceived after frozen embryo transfer (FET) and of 88 children of 44 twin pregnancies after fresh transfer were analysed by means of multiple linear regression.
RESULTS: In vitro culture in medium from Cook resulted in singletons after fresh transfer with a lower mean birthweight (adjusted mean difference, 112 g, P= 0.03), and in more singletons with low birthweight (LBW) <2500 g (P= 0.006) and LBW for GA ≥ 37 weeks (P= 0.015), when compared with singletons born after culture in medium from Vitrolife AB. GA at birth was not related to the medium used (adjusted difference, 0.05 weeks, P = 0.83). Among twins in the Cook group, higher inter-twin mean birthweight disparity and birthweight discordance were found. Z-scores after FET were -0.04 (± 0.14) in the Cook group compared with 0.18 (± 0.21) in the Vitrolife group (P> 0.05).
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings support our hypothesis that culture medium influences perinatal outcome of IVF singletons and twins. A similar trend is seen in case of singletons born after FET. GA was not affected by culture medium. These results indicate that in vitro culture might be an important factor explaining the poorer perinatal outcome after assisted reproduction technology (ART). Further research is needed to confirm this culture medium-induced effect in humans and to provide more insight into whether it is caused by epigenetic disturbance of imprinted genes in fetal or placental tissues. Moreover, embryo culture media and their effects need to be investigated thoroughly to select the best embryo culture medium in order to minimize or prevent short-term risks and maybe even long-term disease susceptibility.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 22552689     DOI: 10.1093/humrep/des145

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Reprod        ISSN: 0268-1161            Impact factor:   6.918


  41 in total

1.  A brief history of the development of the KSOM family of media.

Authors:  Michael C Summers
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 3.412

Review 2.  Blastocyst culture using single versus sequential media in clinical IVF: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Ioannis A Sfontouris; Wellington P Martins; Carolina O Nastri; Iara G R Viana; Paula A Navarro; Nick Raine-Fenning; Sheryl van der Poel; Laura Rienzi; Catherine Racowsky
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2016-08-05       Impact factor: 3.412

Review 3.  Epigenetically regulated imprinted gene expression associated with IVF and infertility: possible influence of prenatal stress and depression.

Authors:  Julia F Litzky; Carmen J Marsit
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2019-05-24       Impact factor: 3.412

Review 4.  Microfluidic analysis of oocyte and embryo biomechanical properties to improve outcomes in assisted reproductive technologies.

Authors:  Livia Z Yanez; David B Camarillo
Journal:  Mol Hum Reprod       Date:  2017-04-01       Impact factor: 4.025

Review 5.  Considerations Regarding Embryo Culture Conditions: From Media to Epigenetics.

Authors:  Mara Simopoulou; Konstantinos Sfakianoudis; Anna Rapani; Polina Giannelou; George Anifandis; Stamatis Bolaris; Agni Pantou; Maria Lambropoulou; Athanasios Pappas; Efthimios Deligeoroglou; Konstantinos Pantos; Michael Koutsilieris
Journal:  In Vivo       Date:  2018 May-Jun       Impact factor: 2.155

6.  Assisted reproductive technologies induce temporally specific placental defects and the preeclampsia risk marker sFLT1 in mouse.

Authors:  Lisa A Vrooman; Eric A Rhon-Calderon; Olivia Y Chao; Duy K Nguyen; Laren Narapareddy; Asha K Dahiya; Mary E Putt; Richard M Schultz; Marisa S Bartolomei
Journal:  Development       Date:  2020-05-29       Impact factor: 6.868

Review 7.  Cardiometabolic health of children conceived by assisted reproductive technologies.

Authors:  Edwina H Yeung; Charlotte Druschel
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2013-01-08       Impact factor: 7.329

8.  Examining Infertility Treatment and Early Childhood Development in the Upstate KIDS Study.

Authors:  Edwina H Yeung; Rajeshwari Sundaram; Erin M Bell; Charlotte Druschel; Christopher Kus; Akhgar Ghassabian; Scott Bello; Yunlong Xie; Germaine M Buck Louis
Journal:  JAMA Pediatr       Date:  2016-03       Impact factor: 16.193

Review 9.  Low birth weight: is it related to assisted reproductive technology or underlying infertility?

Authors:  Laxmi A Kondapalli; Alfredo Perales-Puchalt
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2013-02       Impact factor: 7.329

10.  Effects of Embryo Transfer on Emotional Behaviors in C57BL/6 Mice.

Authors:  Sandra Lerch; Gabriele Tolksdorf; Patrizia Schütz; Christiane Brandwein; Christof Dormann; Peter Gass; Sabine Chourbaji
Journal:  J Am Assoc Lab Anim Sci       Date:  2016       Impact factor: 1.232

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.