Literature DB >> 24578475

Correlation between standard blastocyst morphology, euploidy and implantation: an observational study in two centers involving 956 screened blastocysts.

Antonio Capalbo1, Laura Rienzi, Danilo Cimadomo, Roberta Maggiulli, Thomas Elliott, Graham Wright, Zsolt Peter Nagy, Filippo Maria Ubaldi.   

Abstract

STUDY QUESTION: Does conventional blastocyst morphological evaluation correlate with euploidy (as assessed by comprehensive chromosome screening (CCS) of trophectoderm (TE) biopsies) and implantation potential? SUMMARY ANSWER: A moderate relation between blastocyst morphology and CCS data was observed but the ability to implant seems to be mainly determined by the chromosomal complement of preimplantation embryos rather than developmental and morphological parameters conventionally used for blastocyst evaluation. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Combined with improving methods for cryopreservation and blastocyst culture, TE biopsy and CCS is considered to be a promising approach to select euploid embryos for transfer. Understanding the role of morphology in blastocyst stage preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) cycles may help in further optimizing the cycle management and clinical outcomes. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This is a multicenter retrospective observational study performed between January 2009 and August 2013. The study includes the data analysis of 956 blastocysts with conclusive CCS results obtained from 213 patients following 223 PGS cycles. Single frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles of 215 euploid blastocysts were performed where it was possible to track the implantation outcome of each embryo transferred. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING,
METHODS: PGS was offered to infertile patients of advanced maternal age (>35 years) and/or with a history of unsuccessful IVF treatments (more than two failed IVF cycles) and/or previous spontaneous abortion (more than two spontaneous miscarriages). Prior to TE biopsy for CCS, blastocyst morphology was assessed and categorized in four groups (excellent, good, average and poor quality). The developmental rate of each embryo reaching the expanded blastocyst stage was defined according to the day of biopsy post-fertilization. Day 5 and Day 6 biopsied blastocysts were defined as faster and slower growing embryos, respectively. A novel blastocyst biopsy method, not requiring the opening of the zona pellucida at the cleavage stage of embryo development, was used. Linear regression models were used to test the relationship between blastocyst morphology and developmental rate CCS data and FET cycle outcomes of euploid blastocysts. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Among the embryological variables assessed (morphology and developmental rate), only blastocyst morphology was predictive of the CCS data. The euploidy rate was 56.4, 39.1, 42.8 and 25.5% in the excellent, good, average and poor blastocyst morphology groups, respectively. A diagnosis of complex aneuploidy was also associated with blastocyst morphology (P < 0.01) with 6.8, 15.2, 17.4 and 27.5% of excellent, good, average and poor quality embryos, respectively, showing multiple chromosome errors. Faster and slower growing embryos showed a similar aneuploidy rate. Regression logistic analysis showed that none of the parameters used for conventional blastocyst evaluation (morphology and developmental rate) was predictive of the implantation potential of euploid embryos. The implantation potential of euploid embryos was the same, despite different morphologies and developmental rates. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The study is limited by its retrospective nature. A higher sample size or a prospective randomized design could be used in future studies to corroborate the current findings. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE
FINDINGS: This study provides knowledge for a better laboratory and clinical management of blastocyst stage PGS cycles suggesting that the commonly used parameters of blastocyst evaluation are not good enough indicators to improve the selection among euploid embryos. Accordingly, all poor morphology and slower growing expanded blastocysts should be biopsied and similarly considered for FET cycles. This knowledge will be of critical importance to achieve similar cumulative live birth rates in PGS programs compared with conventional IVF, avoiding the potential for exclusion of low quality but viable embryos from the biopsy and transfer procedures. Future research to identify non-invasive biomarkers of reproductive potential may further enhance selection among euploid blastocysts. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): No funding was obtained for the study. All authors have no conflicts to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: None.

Entities:  

Keywords:  aneuploidies; blastocyst biopsy; blastocyst morphology; embryo evaluation; preimplantation genetic screening

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24578475     DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deu033

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


  118 in total

1.  Do patient factors influence embryologists' decisions to freeze borderline blastocysts?

Authors:  T Burns; E R Hammond; L Cree; D E Morbeck; N S Consedine
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2020-06-26       Impact factor: 3.412

2.  Initial maternal serum human chorionic gonadotropin levels in pregnancies achieved after assisted reproductive technology are higher after preimplantation genetic screening and after frozen embryo transfer: a retrospective cohort.

Authors:  Elie Hobeika; Sonali Singh; Shaveta Malik; Eric S Knochenhauer; Michael L Traub
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2017-06-21       Impact factor: 3.412

3.  Morphokinetic Evaluation of Embryo Development in a Mouse Model: Functional and Molecular Correlates.

Authors:  Rachel Weinerman; Rui Feng; Teri S Ord; Richard M Schultz; Marisa S Bartolomei; Christos Coutifaris; Monica Mainigi
Journal:  Biol Reprod       Date:  2016-02-24       Impact factor: 4.285

4.  Polar body transfer restores the developmental potential of oocytes to blastocyst stage in a case of repeated embryo fragmentation.

Authors:  Shuo-Ping Zhang; Chang-Fu Lu; Fei Gong; Ping-Yuan Xie; Liang Hu; Shun-Ji Zhang; Guang-Xiu Lu; Ge Lin
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2017-02-11       Impact factor: 3.412

5.  Noninvasive preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy in spent medium may be more reliable than trophectoderm biopsy.

Authors:  Lei Huang; Berhan Bogale; Yaqiong Tang; Sijia Lu; Xiaoliang Sunney Xie; Catherine Racowsky
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2019-06-24       Impact factor: 11.205

6.  Pregnancy rates for single embryo transfer (SET) of day 5 and day 6 blastocysts after cryopreservation by vitrification and slow freeze.

Authors:  Leah Kaye; Erica Anspach Will; Alison Bartolucci; John Nulsen; Claudio Benadiva; Lawrence Engmann
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2017-05-12       Impact factor: 3.412

7.  Euploid embryos selected by an automated time-lapse system have superior SET outcomes than selected solely by conventional morphology assessment.

Authors:  E Rocafort; M Enciso; A Leza; J Sarasa; J Aizpurua
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2018-07-20       Impact factor: 3.412

8.  Similar miRNomic signatures characterize the follicular fluids collected after follicular and luteal phase stimulations in the same ovarian cycle.

Authors:  Danilo Cimadomo; Ramona Carmelo; Elvira Immacolata Parrotta; Stefania Scalise; Gianluca Santamaria; Erminia Alviggi; Maria Teresa De Angelis; Gianmarco Sarro; Alberto Vaiarelli; Roberta Venturella; Laura Rienzi; Fulvio Zullo; Filippo Maria Ubaldi; Giovanni Cuda
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2019-11-07       Impact factor: 3.412

9.  Euploidy in relation to blastocyst sex and morphology.

Authors:  Ange Wang; Jonathan Kort; Barry Behr; Lynn M Westphal
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2018-07-20       Impact factor: 3.412

10.  Association between growth dynamics, morphological parameters, the chromosomal status of the blastocysts, and clinical outcomes in IVF PGS cycles with single embryo transfer.

Authors:  Oleksii O Barash; Kristen A Ivani; Susan P Willman; Evan M Rosenbluth; Deborah S Wachs; Mary D Hinckley; Sara Pittenger Reid; Louis N Weckstein
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2017-05-30       Impact factor: 3.412

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.