Literature DB >> 35212931

Accumulation of Cleavage-Stage Embryos by Vitrification may Compromise Embryonic Developmental Potential in Preimplantation Genetic Testing.

Shun Xiong1, Xiangwei Hao1, Yang Gao1, Lihong Wu1, Junxia Liu1, Jiang Wang1, Jiahong Zhu1, Jingyu Li2, Dongyun Liu3, Wei Han4, Guoning Huang5.   

Abstract

It was suggested that the embryo pooling was an alternative for patients with insufficient number of embryos for preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) in a single ovarian stimulation cycle. However, limited study noticed whether it is an efficient strategy to pool cleavage-stage embryos by vitrification. This study included 71 cycles with vitrified-warmed and fresh embryos simultaneously for PGT between May 2016 and May 2021. The embryos from the same patients were split into two groups based on the origin: warming group and fresh group. Embryo development, sequencing results, clinical and neonatal outcomes were compared. The results showed that the rate of high-quality embryos in the warming group was significantly higher than that in the fresh group (64.53% versus 52.61%, P = 0.011); however, the available blastocyst rate in this group was significantly lower than that in the fresh group (47.29% versus 57.83%, P = 0.026). There were 96 and 144 blastocysts that underwent trophectoderm (TE) biopsy in warming and fresh groups, respectively. The high-quality blastocyst rate was significantly lower in the warming group compared to the fresh group (57.29% versus 70.14%, P = 0.041). The rates of genetic transferable blastocyst were comparable between the two groups (P = 0.956). There were no statistical differences in terms of embryo implantation, clinical pregnancy, miscarriage rates, and neonatal outcomes between the two groups. In conclusion, this study demonstrated that the cleavage-stage embryo pooling strategy might be unfavorable for the maintenance of embryonic development potential. If not necessary, it is not recommended to pool cleavage-stage embryos for PGT.
© 2022. Society for Reproductive Investigation.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Embryo development; Embryo pooling; Pre-implantation genetic testing (PGT); Vitrification

Mesh:

Year:  2022        PMID: 35212931     DOI: 10.1007/s43032-022-00880-8

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Reprod Sci        ISSN: 1933-7191            Impact factor:   3.060


  25 in total

1.  The utility of embryo banking in order to increase the number of embryos available for preimplantation genetic screening in advanced maternal age patients.

Authors:  John J Orris; Tyl H Taylor; Janice W Gilchrist; Susan V Hallowell; Michael J Glassner; J David Wininger
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2010-09-02       Impact factor: 3.412

Review 2.  Selecting the optimal time to perform biopsy for preimplantation genetic testing.

Authors:  Katherine L Scott; Kathleen H Hong; Richard T Scott
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2013-09       Impact factor: 7.329

3.  Vitrification of human embryos previously cryostored by either slow freezing or vitrification results in high pregnancy rates.

Authors:  James Stanger; Jesmine Wong; Jason Conceicao; John Yovich
Journal:  Reprod Biomed Online       Date:  2011-11-30       Impact factor: 3.828

4.  Large baby syndrome in singletons born after frozen embryo transfer (FET): is it due to maternal factors or the cryotechnique?

Authors:  A Pinborg; A A Henningsen; A Loft; S S Malchau; J Forman; A Nyboe Andersen
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2014-01-09       Impact factor: 6.918

5.  Outcomes of blastocysts biopsied and vitrified once versus those cryopreserved twice for euploid blastocyst transfer.

Authors:  Tyl H Taylor; Jennifer L Patrick; Susan A Gitlin; J Michael Wilson; Jack L Crain; Darren K Griffin
Journal:  Reprod Biomed Online       Date:  2014-03-15       Impact factor: 3.828

6.  Comparison of actual vs. synthesized ternary phase diagrams for solutes of cryobiological interest.

Authors:  F W Kleinhans; Peter Mazur
Journal:  Cryobiology       Date:  2007-02-04       Impact factor: 2.487

7.  Pregnancies from biopsied human preimplantation embryos sexed by Y-specific DNA amplification.

Authors:  A H Handyside; E H Kontogianni; K Hardy; R M Winston
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1990-04-19       Impact factor: 49.962

8.  Cleavage-stage biopsy significantly impairs human embryonic implantation potential while blastocyst biopsy does not: a randomized and paired clinical trial.

Authors:  Richard T Scott; Kathleen M Upham; Eric J Forman; Tian Zhao; Nathan R Treff
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2013-06-15       Impact factor: 7.329

9.  Accumulation of oocytes and/or embryos by vitrification: a new strategy for managing poor responder patients undergoing pre implantation diagnosis.

Authors:  Alexia Chatziparasidou; Martine Nijs; Martha Moisidou; Oraiopoulou Chara; Christina Ioakeimidou; Christos Pappas; Nicos Christoforidis
Journal:  F1000Res       Date:  2013-11-12

10.  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
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2017-01-09       Impact factor: 3.412

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.