Hum. Reprod. Advance Access originally published online on April 7, 2004
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Human Reproduction, Vol. 19, No. 5, 1163-1169,
May 2004
© 2004 European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology
The combination of polar body and embryo biopsy does not affect embryo viability
S.I.S.Me.R., Reproductive Medicine Unit, Via Mazzini 12, 40138 Bologna, Italy
1 To whom correspondence should be addressed. e-mail: sismer{at}sismer.it
BACKGROUND: The biopsy of both polar bodies and a blastomere from the same embryo was investigated as an approach aimed at increasing the quantity of DNA available for genetic analysis in preimplantation embryos. METHODS: In 113 cycles, preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) was performed for aneuploidy: 19 cycles underwent polar body biopsy, 32 cycles had both polar body and blastomere biopsy done, and the remaining 62 cycles underwent blastomere biopsy. The chromosomal analysis was performed in a two-round fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) protocol with probes specific for the chromosomes X, Y, 13, 15, 16, 18, 21 and 22. RESULTS: The morphological evaluation of the analysed embryos demonstrated similar rates of development irrespective of the biopsy procedure. Accordingly, the implantation rate did not differ significantly in the three biopsy groups and was 15% after polar body biopsy, 26% after the combined biopsy procedures of polar bodies and blastomeres, and 25% after blastomere biopsy. CONCLUSIONS: The removal of a blastomere subsequent to polar body biopsy does not seem to have negative effects on embryo viability. This approach could be especially valuable for a combined diagnosis of aneuploidy and single-gene disorders in preimplantation embryos generated by couples at high reproductive risk.
Key words: aneuploidy/blastomere biopsy/embryo viability/polar body biopsy/preimplantation genetic diagnosis
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  V. Goossens, M. De Rycke, A. De Vos, C. Staessen, A. Michiels, W. Verpoest, A. Van Steirteghem, C. Bertrand, I. Liebaers, P. Devroey, et al. Diagnostic efficiency, embryonic development and clinical outcome after the biopsy of one or two blastomeres for preimplantation genetic diagnosis Hum. Reprod., March 1, 2008; 23(3): 481 - 492. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. M.H. Combelles What are the trade-offs between one-cell and two-cell biopsies of preimplantation embryos? Hum. Reprod., March 1, 2008; 23(3): 493 - 498. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. Pujol, J. Benet, C. Staessen, E. Van Assche, M. Campillo, J. Egozcue, and J. Navarro The importance of aneuploidy screening in reciprocal translocation carriers. Reproduction, June 1, 2006; 131(6): 1025 - 1035. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J. Cohen and S. Munne Comment 2 on Staessen et al. (2004). Two-cell biopsy and PGD pregnancy outcome Hum. Reprod., August 1, 2005; 20(8): 2363 - 2364. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Staessen, P. Platteau, E. Van Assche, A. Michiels, H. Tournaye, M. Camus, P. Devroey, I. Liebaers, and A.C. Van Steirteghem Reply to Comments on Staessen et al. (2004) Hum. Reprod., August 1, 2005; 20(8): 2364 - 2365. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. F. Sanchez-Garcia, J. Benet, C. Gutierrez-Mateo, J. Luis Seculi, E. Monros, and J. Navarro Multiple mutation analysis of the cystic fibrosis gene in single cells Mol. Hum. Reprod., June 1, 2005; 11(6): 463 - 468. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 L. Gianaroli, M. C. Magli, and A. P. Ferraretti Sperm and Blastomere Aneuploidy Detection in Reproductive Genetics and Medicine J. Histochem. Cytochem., March 1, 2005; 53(3): 261 - 267. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|