Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF ) Freely available
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (23)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Edirisinghe, W. R.
Right arrow Articles by Yovich, J. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Edirisinghe, W. R.
Right arrow Articles by Yovich, J. L.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Human Reproduction, Vol 12, 2784-2791, Copyright © 1997 by Oxford University Press


ARTICLES

Cytogenetic abnormalities of unfertilized oocytes generated from in- vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection: a double- blind study

WR Edirisinghe, A Murch, S Junk and JL Yovich
PIVET Medical Centre, Leederville, Perth, Western Australia.

In the present study we have assessed the cytogenetic abnormalities of unfertilized oocytes from in-vitro fertilization (IVF) and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) programmes during a one year period (July 1995 to July 1996) with the cytogenetic analysis being carried out in a double-blind manner. A total of 88 unfertilized ICSI and 85 unfertilized IVF oocytes were used for the study and of these 51 and 62 oocytes, in each respective group, were suitable for analysis. The haploidy, diploidy and aneuploidy rates between ICSI (62.7, 7.8 and 5.9%) and IVF (61.3, 9.7 and 14.5%) groups were similar. A significant inter-patient variation in the incidence of hypohaploidy was observed within the IVF group. Chromosomal fragmentation or breakage was observed at a similar rate in both groups of unfertilized oocytes (23.5 and 14.5% for ICSI and IVF respectively). A significantly higher proportion of ICSI oocytes contained sperm nuclei (27/51, 52.9%) than did IVF oocytes (20/62, 32.3%, P < 0.01). The distribution and state of sperm head chromatin in relation to oocyte chromosomal complement was studied in both groups. ICSI oocytes contained decondensed or swollen sperm nuclei in association with haploid oocyte chromosomes (12/27, 44.4%) or condensed sperm heads in oocytes showing no chromosomal complements (7/27, 25.9%). In IVF oocytes sperm heads were either arrested in the condensed state (5/20, 25%), metaphase stage (3/20, 15%) or had undergone premature chromosome condensation (PCC; 6/20, 30%) in association with haploid oocyte chromosomes. The incidence of PCC was similar in the two groups. A marked variation in the incidence of total chromosomal abnormality was observed between patients within both ICSI (0-75%) and IVF (0-71%) groups indicating a possible similarity in oocyte quality between the majority of male factor and tubal infertility patients. The type of sperm used in the two fertilization procedures showed an increased incidence of chromosomal breakage with ICSI-MESA (microepididymal sperm aspiration) spermatozoa (4/6, 67%) compared to the ICSI-ejaculated (6/35, 17.1%; P < 0.05), ICSI-testicular biopsy (2/10, 20%) and IVF-normospermic (9/62, 14.5%; P < 0.01) spermatozoa. Chromosomal fragmentation may be associated with the degree of difficulty experienced at sperm injection, especially with sperm retrieved from the reproductive tract. Thus chromosomal fragmentation in ICSI may need further investigation using a larger sample size in order to assess the possible causative factors.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
S. Delimitreva, R. Zhivkova, E. Isachenko, N. Umland, and P.L. Nayudu
Meiotic abnormalities in in vitro-matured marmoset monkey (Callithrix jacchus) oocytes: development of a non-human primate model to investigate causal factors
Hum. Reprod., January 1, 2006; 21(1): 240 - 247.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
C. Gutierrez-Mateo, J. Benet, D. Wells, P. Colls, M.G. Bermudez, J.F. Sanchez-Garcia, J. Egozcue, J. Navarro, and S. Munne
Aneuploidy study of human oocytes first polar body comparative genomic hybridization and metaphase II fluorescence in situ hybridization analysis
Hum. Reprod., December 1, 2004; 19(12): 2859 - 2868.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Arch OphthalmolHome page
J. R. M. Cruysberg, A. C. Moll, S. M. Imhof, I. Anteby, E. Cohen, E. Anteby, and D. BenEzra
Bilateral Sporadic Retinoblastoma in a Child Born After In Vitro Fertilization
Arch Ophthalmol, December 1, 2002; 120(12): 1773 - 1774.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Biol. Reprod.Home page
L. Liu, J. R. Trimarchi, and D. L. Keefe
Haploidy but Not Parthenogenetic Activation Leads to Increased Incidence of Apoptosis in Mouse Embryos
Biol Reprod, January 1, 2002; 66(1): 204 - 210.
[Abstract] [Full Text]


Home page
Arch OphthalmolHome page
I. Anteby, E. Cohen, E. Anteby, and D. BenEzra
Ocular Manifestations in Children Born After In Vitro Fertilization
Arch Ophthalmol, October 1, 2001; 119(10): 1525 - 1529.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
E. Neuber and R.D. Powers
Is the mouse a clinically relevant model for human fertilization failures?
Hum. Reprod., January 1, 2000; 15(1): 171 - 174.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Hum ReprodHome page
P.M.M. Kastrop, S.M. Weima, R.J. Van Kooij, and E.R. Te Velde
Comparison between intracytoplasmic sperm injection and in-vitro fertilization (IVF) with high insemination concentration after total fertilization failure in a previous IVF attempt
Hum. Reprod., January 1, 1999; 14(1): 65 - 69.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.