Similar articles

Abstract: Objective: Embryonic chromosomal abnormality is one of the main reasons for in vitro fertilization (IVF) failure. This study aimed at evaluating the value of fluorescence in-situ Hybridization (FISH)-based preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) in screening for embryonic chromosomal abnormality to increase the successful rate of IVF. Method: Ten couples, four with high risk of chromosomal abnormality and six infertile couples, underwent FISH-based PGD during IVF procedure. At day 3, one or two blastomeres were aspirated from each embryo. Biopsied blastomeres were examined using FISH analysis to screen out embryos with chromosomal abnormalities. At day 4, embryos without detectable chromosomal abnormality were transferred to the mother bodies as in regular IVF. Results: Among 54 embryos screened using FISH-based PGD, 30 embryos were detected to have chromosomal abnormalities. The 24 healthy embryos were implanted, resulting in four clinical pregnancies, two of which led to successful normal birth of two healthy babies; one to ongoing pregnancy during the writing of this article; and one to ectopic pregnancy. Conclusion: FISH-based PGD is an effective method for detecting embryonic chromosomal abnormality, which is one of the common causes of spontaneous miscarriages and chromosomally unbalanced offsprings.

[1] Bielanska, M., Tan, S.L., Ao, A., 2000. Fluorescence in-situ hybridization of sex chromosomes in spermatozoa and spare preimplantation embryos of a Klinefelter 46, XY/47, XXY male. Hum Reprod, 15:440-444.

[2] Jin, F., Shi, Y.F., Zhou, F.Z., Huang, H.F., 1998. Influence of sperm quality and quantity on fertilization, cleavage rates and quality of embryos in in-vitro fertilization. Chin J Obstet Gynecol., 33:28-30 (in Chinese).

[3] Gianaroli, L., Magli, M.C., Ferraretti, A.P., Fiorentino, A., Garrisi, J., Munne, S., 1997. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis increases the implantation rate in human in vitro fertilization by avoiding the transfer of chromosomally abnormal embryos. Fertil Steril, 68:1128-1131.

[4] Knight, S.J., Flint, J., 2000. Perfect endings: a review of subtelomeric probes and their use in clinical diagnosis. J Med Genet, 37:401-409.

[5] Munné, S., Fung, J., Cassel, M.J., Marquez, C., Weier, H.U., 1998a. Preimplantation genetic analysis of translocations: case(specific probes for interphase cell analysis. Hum Genet, 102:663-674.

[6] Munné, S., Márquez, C., Reing, A., Garrisi, J., Alikani, M., 1998b. Chromosome abnormalities in embryos obtained after conventional in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Fertil Steril, 69:904-908.

[7] Simpson, J.L., 2001. Changing indications for preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD). Molecular and Cellular Endocrinology, 183:S69-S75.

[8] Staessen, C., Tournaye, H., Van Assche, E., Michiels, A., Van Landuyt, L., Devroey, P., Liebaers, I., Van Steirteghem, A., 2003. PGD in 47, XXY Klinefelter’s syndrome patients. Hum Reprod Update, 9:319-330.

[9] Verlinsky, Y., Kuliev, A., 1996. Preimplantation diagnosis of common aneuploidies in infertile couples of advanced maternal age. Hum Reprod, 11:2076-2077.

[10] Wilton, L., 2002. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploid screening in early human embryos: a review. Prenat Diagn, 22:512-518.