| Literature DB >> 35740996 |
Cristina Rodríguez-Varela1, Elena Labarta1,2.
Abstract
Mitochondria transfer techniques were first designed to prevent the transmission of diseases due to mutations in mtDNA, as these organelles are exclusively transmitted to the offspring by the oocyte. Despite this, given the crucial role of mitochondria in oocyte maturation, fertilization and subsequent embryo development, these approaches have been proposed as new potential strategies to overcome poor oocyte quality in infertile patients. This condition is a very common cause of infertility in patients of advanced maternal age, and patients with previous in vitro fertilization (IVF) attempt failures of oocyte origin. In this context, the enrichment or the replacement of the whole set of the oocyte mitochondria may improve its quality and increase these patients' chances of success after an IVF treatment. In this short review, we will provide a brief overview of the main human studies using heterologous and autologous mitochondria transfer techniques in the reproductive field, focusing on the etiology of the treated patients and the final outcome. Although there is no current clearly superior mitochondria transfer technique, efforts must be made in order to optimize them and bring them into regular clinical practice, giving these patients a chance to achieve a pregnancy with their own oocytes.Entities:
Keywords: advanced maternal age; autologous; heterologous; in vitro fertilization; infertility; mitochondria; mitochondria transfer; poor embryo quality; poor oocyte quality
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35740996 PMCID: PMC9221194 DOI: 10.3390/cells11121867
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Cells ISSN: 2073-4409 Impact factor: 7.666
Figure 1Schematic representation of mitochondria transfer techniques in order to improve poor oocyte quality in infertile patients. Autologous and heterologous techniques are specified.
Main human clinical studies using heterologous mitochondria transfer.
| Study Name | Type of Mitochondria Transfer |
| Patients’ Etiology | Main Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Cohen, 1997 [ | Ooplasmic transfer | 1 patient | History of impaired embryo development | First human birth using this approach |
| Cohen, 1998 [ | 8 cycles | Repeated implantation failure | Improved results using the injection technique vs. electrofusion. | |
| Brenner, 2000 [ | 23 cycles | Twelve clinical pregnancies and overall improved embryo development. | ||
| Huang, 1999 [ | 9 cycles | Five healthy infants after ooplasmic transfer from tripronucleated zygotes | ||
| Dale, 2001 [ | 1 patient | Birth of healthy twins | ||
| Chen, 2016 [ | 33 cycles | Follow-up study of 17 healthy infants from 13 couples [ | ||
| Sobek, 2021 [ | 125 cycles | Low ovarian function | Increased fertilization and embryo development rates. A reduction in fertilization rates with age was observed in the control group but not in the | |
| Zhang, 1999 [ | GV transfer | 60 GVs | Advanced maternal age | 12 GVs were successfully removed, transferred, and fused into previously enucleated oocytes from young patients. |
| Darbandi, 2020 [ | 10 GVs | 0% fusion rate | ||
| Tanaka, 2009 [ | Spindle transfer | 31 MII spindle transfer group | In vitro matured MII | 25/31 correctly fused (80.6%). |
| Zhang, 2017 [ | 1 patient | History of pregnancy loss and asymptomatic carrier of a Leigh syndrome mutation | First human birth after spindle transfer | |
| Costa-Borges, 2020 [ | 9 cycles | Age range 32–40 years. | Preliminary results from a larger pilot study (n = 25). | |
| Craven, 2010 [ | PN transfer | 80 uni- and tripronucleated zygotes with PN transfer vs. | Transfer of PN from | First PN transfer attempt in humans. |
| Hyslop, 2016 [ | 523 MII | MII donated oocytes fertilized with donated sperm | Alternative approach based on transplanting | |
| Zhang, 2016 [ | 1 patient | History of embryo | Viable pregnancy with normal karyotype and minimal mtDNA heteroplasmy | |
| Ma, 2017 [ | PB1 transfer | 32 oocytes in PB1T group vs. 21 in the control group | Healthy volunteers | Oocytes supported the formation of de novo |
| Zhang, 2017 [ | PB1 and PB2 transfer | 1 patient | Repeated embryo | PB1T but not PB2T into enucleated in vitro |
| Tang, 2019 [ | PB2 transfer | 134 oocytes | In vitro matured oocytes and in vivo matured oocytes with smooth endoplasmic reticulum aggregate, both donated from young women | Novel strategy for PB2 transfer. |
MII: metaphase II. PN: pronuclear. GV: germinal vesicle. PB: polar body. PBT: polar body transfer. mtDNA: mitochondrial DNA. p < 0.05 are considered statistically significant.
Main human clinical studies using autologous mitochondria transfer.
| Study Name | Type of Mitochondria Transfer |
| Patients’ Etiology | Main Outcome |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Fakih, 2015 [ | Ovarian stem cells | 59 + 34 patients | Poor oocyte and embryo quality | Poor study design with high bias. |
| Oktay, 2015 [ | 16 patients | 2 or more previous IVF | Poor study design with high bias. | |
| Labarta, 2019 [ | 57 patients | Previous IVF failures and well-documented poor | Intrapatient and intracycle comparison design. | |
| Kong, 2004 [ | Granulosa cells | 18 patients | A previous failed IVF | Similar fertilization rates (74.4% vs. 76.8% in the control group; |
| Tzeng, 2004 [ | 71 cycles vs. 81 | A previous failed IVF | Significantly higher pregnancy rates (35.2% vs. 6.2% in the historic control group; |
p < 0.05 are considered statistically significant.
Summary table of the clinical use in infertile patients and the main results of the different techniques here described. Clinical use is defined as:
| Type of Mitochondria Transfer | Clinically Used in Infertile Patients (Yes/No) | Has Showed Promising Results (Yes/No) | Live Birth/s (Yes/No) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ooplasmic transfer | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Germinal vesicle transfer | Yes | Yes | No |
| Spindle transfer | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Pronuclear transfer | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| First polar body transfer | Yes | Yes | No |
| Second polar body transfer | Yes | No | No |
| Ovarian stem cells | Yes | No | Yes |
| Immature oocytes | No | - | - |
| Granulosa cells | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Non-ovarian stem cells | No | - | - |