Literature DB >> 26006737

Blastocoel fluid from differentiated blastocysts harbors embryonic genomic material capable of a whole-genome deoxyribonucleic acid amplification and comprehensive chromosome microarray analysis.

Kyle J Tobler1, Yulian Zhao2, Ric Ross3, Andy T Benner4, Xin Xu4, Luke Du4, Kathleen Broman2, Kim Thrift2, Paul R Brezina5, William G Kearns6.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To obtain embryonic molecular karyotypes from genomic DNA (deoxyribonucleic acid) isolated from blastocoel fluid (BF) and to compare these karyotypes with the karyotypes from the remaining inner cell mass (ICM) and trophectoderm (TE) of the blastocyst.
DESIGN: Prospective cohort study.
SETTING: Academic center and preimplantation genetics laboratory. PATIENT(S): Ninety-six donated cryopreserved embryos. INTERVENTION(S): Embryo biopsy, BF aspiration, DNA analysis using a comparative genomic hybridization microarray (aCGH). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): The aCGH of a single blastomere, BF-DNA, and ICM-TE. RESULT(S): The BF-DNA samples resulted in a successful aCGH in 63% of cases. Discordance in karyotypes was found between the BF-DNA and the ICM-TE in 52% of cases. A total of 70% of aneusomic (mosaicism), cleavage-stage embryos differentiated into euploid blastocysts. Probabilities for diagnostic accuracy were calculated and demonstrated the following: sensitivity of 0.88 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.62-0.98); specificity of 0.55 (95% CI: 0.39-0.70); positive predictive value of 0.41 (95% CI: 0.25-0.60); negative predictive value of 0.92 (95% CI: 0.75-0.99). CONCLUSION(S): Genomic DNA from the BF can be amplified and characterized by comprehensive chromosome microarrays. The results demonstrated that aneusomic cleavage-stage embryos differentiated into euploid blastocysts, possibly using a mechanism that marginalizes aneuploid nuclei into the blastocoel cavity. In addition, owing to the high discordance between the karyotypes obtained from the BF-DNA and the ICM-TE, using BF-DNA for preimplantation genetic testing is not yet advised. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Blastocoel fluid; comparative genomic hybridization; microarray; preimplantation genetic screening; preimplantation genetic testing

Mesh:

Year:  2015        PMID: 26006737     DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.04.028

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Fertil Steril        ISSN: 0015-0282            Impact factor:   7.329


  25 in total

1.  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

Review 2.  Recent advances in preimplantation genetic diagnosis and screening.

Authors:  Lina Lu; Bo Lv; Kevin Huang; Zhigang Xue; Xianmin Zhu; Guoping Fan
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2016-06-07       Impact factor: 3.412

3.  Artificial shrinkage of blastocysts prior to vitrification improves pregnancy outcome: analysis of 1028 consecutive warming cycles.

Authors:  Paolo Emanuele Levi-Setti; Francesca Menduni; Antonella Smeraldi; Pasquale Patrizio; Emanuela Morenghi; Elena Albani
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2016-01-19       Impact factor: 3.412

4.  Molecular analysis of DNA in blastocoele fluid using next-generation sequencing.

Authors:  Yixin Zhang; Na Li; Li Wang; Huiying Sun; Minyue Ma; Hui Wang; Xiaofei Xu; Wenke Zhang; Yingyu Liu; David S Cram; Baofa Sun; Yuanqing Yao
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2016-02-22       Impact factor: 3.412

Review 5.  From contemplation to classification of chromosomal mosaicism in human preimplantation embryos.

Authors:  Igor N Lebedev; Daria I Zhigalina
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2021-09-13       Impact factor: 3.412

Review 6.  Preimplantation Genetic Testing for Monogenic Conditions: Is Cell-Free DNA Testing the Next Step?

Authors:  Deirdre Zander-Fox; Tristan Hardy; Alice Rogers; Melody Menezes; Stefan C Kane
Journal:  Mol Diagn Ther       Date:  2021-09-08       Impact factor: 4.074

Review 7.  The why, the how and the when of PGS 2.0: current practices and expert opinions of fertility specialists, molecular biologists, and embryologists.

Authors:  Karen Sermon; Antonio Capalbo; Jacques Cohen; Edith Coonen; Martine De Rycke; Anick De Vos; Joy Delhanty; Francesco Fiorentino; Norbert Gleicher; Georg Griesinger; Jamie Grifo; Alan Handyside; Joyce Harper; Georgia Kokkali; Sebastiaan Mastenbroek; David Meldrum; Marcos Meseguer; Markus Montag; Santiago Munné; Laura Rienzi; Carmen Rubio; Katherine Scott; Richard Scott; Carlos Simon; Jason Swain; Nathan Treff; Filippo Ubaldi; Rita Vassena; Joris Robert Vermeesch; Willem Verpoest; Dagan Wells; Joep Geraedts
Journal:  Mol Hum Reprod       Date:  2016-06-02       Impact factor: 4.025

8.  Relationship between blastocoel cell-free DNA and day-5 blastocyst morphology.

Authors:  Kiersten Rule; Renee J Chosed; T Arthur Chang; J David Wininger; William E Roudebush
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2018-06-04       Impact factor: 3.412

Review 9.  Cell-free DNA discoveries in human reproductive medicine: providing a new tool for biomarker and genetic assays in ART.

Authors:  Maryam Qasemi; Reza Mahdian; Fardin Amidi
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2021-01-09       Impact factor: 3.412

10.  Diagnostic efficiency of blastocyst culture medium in noninvasive preimplantation genetic testing.

Authors:  Jingbo Chen; Lei Jia; Tingting Li; Yingchun Guo; Shujing He; Zhiqiang Zhang; Wenlong Su; Shihui Zhang; Cong Fang
Journal:  F S Rep       Date:  2020-09-15
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.