López-Rioja MJ, Aguinaga-Ríos M, Sánchez-González CM, Recio-López Y, Zavala- González PN, García-Sánchez R, Chávez-Badiola A

Idioma: Español
Referencias bibliográficas: 47
Paginas: 96-107
Archivo PDF: 463.13 Kb.

RESUMEN

Objetivo: Comunicar los resultados obtenidos del análisis del estudio genético preimplantación para aneuploidias en dos centros de reproducción asistida de México en un periodo de tres años, utilizando dos diferentes técnicas moleculares.
Materiales y Métodos: Estudio observacional, retrospectivo, en donde se reporta el resultado de blastocistos sometidos a preimplantación para aneuploidias durante 2014-2017, en dos centros de reproducción asistida (Ciudad de México y Guadalajara).
Resultados: Se analizaron 404 blastocistos de 129 pacientes (edad promedio 39 ± 4 años). Los embriones se dividieron en dos grupos según la técnica aplicada: 76 por a-CGH y 328 por secuenciación de nueva generación. El porcentaje de embriones euploides fue de 33%. Las aneuploidias numéricas fueron las más frecuentes. Hasta la terminación del estudio se habían transferido 69 embriones euploides con tasas de implantación de 78% para secuenciación de nueva generación y de 57% para a-CGH.
Conclusiones: La tasa de implantación reportada en este estudio fue mayor con el análisis de preimplantación para aneuploidias por secuenciación de nueva generación. Los resultados reportados en nuestra experiencia soportan la necesidad de favorecer una opción de transferencia de embrión único. Es importante reconocer los retos de las nuevas tecnologías y la necesidad de técnicas moleculares más sensibles.

REFERENCIAS (EN ESTE ARTÍCULO)

1. Hodes-Wertz B, Grifo J, Ghadir S, et al. Idiopathic recurrent miscarriage is caused mostly by aneuploid embryos. Fertil Steril 2012; 98:675-680.

2. Scott R, Upham K, Forman E, et al. Blastocyst biopsy with comprehensive chromosome screening and fresh embryo transfer significantly increases in vitro fertilization implantation and delivery rates: a randomized controlled trial. Fertil Steril 2013; 100:697-703.

3. De Rycke M, Belva F, Goossens V, et al. ESHRE PGD Consortium data collection XIII: cycles from January to December 2010 with pregnancy follow-up to October 2011. Hum Reprod 2015; 30:1763-1789.

4. Schiewe M. The Historic Development and Incorporation of Four Assisted Reproductive Technologies Shaping Today’s IVF Industry. FIV Reprod Med Genet 2016; 4:173-180.

5. Schoolcraft W, Fragouli E, Stevens J, et al. Clinical application of comprehensive chromosomal screening at the blastocyst stage. Fertil Steril 2010; 94:1700-1706.

6. Schoolcraft WB, Treff NR, Stevens JM, et al. Live birth outcome with trophectoderm biopsy, blastocyst vitrification, and single-nucleotide polymorphism microarray–based comprehensive chromosome screening in infertile patients. Fertil Steril 2011; 96:638-640.

7. Schoolcraft W, Katz-Jaffe M. Comprehensive chromosome screening of trophectoderm with vitrification facilitates elective single-embryo transfer for infertile women with advanced maternal age. Fertil Steril 2013; 100:615-619.

8. Harper JC. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis 2a ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. United Kingdom; 2009. 274-285p.

9. Handyside AH, Kontogianni EH, Hardy K, et al. Pregnancies from biopsied human preimplantation embryos sexed by Y-specific DNA amplification. Nature 1990; 244: 768-770.

10. Verlinsky Y, Ginsberg N, Lifchez A, et al. 1990. Analysis of the first polar body: preconception genetic diagnosis. Hum Reprod 1990; 5:826-829.

11. Simpson JL. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis at 20 years. Prenat Diagn 2010; 30:682-695.

12. Griffin DK, Handyside AH, Penketh RJ, et al. Fluorescent in-situ hybridization to interphase nuclei of human preimplantation embryos with X and Y chromosome specific probes. Hum Reprod 1991; 6:101-105.

13. Grifo JA, Boyle A, Tang YX, et al. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis. In situ hybridization as a tool for analysis. Arch Pathol Lab Med 1992; 116:393-397.

14. Munne S, Lee A, Rosenwaks Z, et al. Diagnosis of major chromosome aneuploidies in human preimplantation embryos. Hum Reprod 1993; 8:2185-2191.

15. Munne S, Fragouli E, Colls P, et al. Improved detection of aneuploid blastocysts using a new 12-chromosome FISH test. Reprod Biomed 2010; 20:92-97.

16. Wells D, Alfarawati S, Fragouli E. Use of comprehensive chromosomal screening for embryo assessment microarrays and CGH. Mol Hum Reprod 2008; 14:703-710.

17. Wells D, Fragouli E, Alfarawaty S, et al. Highly significant improvement in embryo implantation and increased live birth rate achieved after comprehensive chromosomal screening: Implications for single embryo transfer. Fertil Steril 2009;3: s268.

18. Handyside AH, Harton GL, Mariani B, et al. Karyomapping: a universal method for genome wide analysis of genetic disease based on mapping crossovers between parental haplotypes. J Med Genet 2010; 10:651-658.

19. Treff N, Tao X, Su J, et al. Four-hour 24 chromosome aneuploidy screening using high throughput PCR SNP allele ratio analysis. Fertil Steril 2009;3: s169.

20. Rubio C, Rodrigo L, Mir P, et al. Use of array comparative genomic hybridization (array-CGH) for embryo assessment: clinical results. Fertil Steril 2013; 99:1044-1048.

21. Fiorentino F, Bono S, Biricik A, et al. Application of next-generation sequencing technology for comprehensive aneuploidy screening of blastocysts in clinical preimplantation genetic screening cycles. Hum Reprod 2014; 29:2802-2813.

22. Kung A, Munné S, Bankowski B, et al. Validation of nextgeneration sequencing for comprehensive chromosome screening of Embryos. Reprod Biomed Online 2015; 31:760-769.

23. Brezina PR, Benner A, Rechitsky S, et al. Single-gene testing combined with single nucleotide polymorphism microarray preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidy: a novel approach in optimizing pregnancy outcome. Fertil Steril 2011; 5:1786-1788.

24. Yang Z. Liu J, Collins GS, et al. Selection of single blastocysts for fresh transfer via standard morphology assessment alone and with array CGH for good prognosis IVF patients: results from a randomized pilot study. Mol Cytogenet 2012;5-8.

25. Zhang J. Luteal phase ovarian stimulation following oocyte retrieval: is it helpful for poor responders? Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2015; 13:76-80.

26. Mastenbroek S, Twisk M, Van Echten-Arends J, et al. In vitro fertilization with preimplantation genetic screening. N Engl J Med 2007; 357:9–17.

27. Forman EJ, Hong KH, Ferry KM, et al. In vitro fertilization with single euploid blastocyst transfer: a randomized controlled trial. Fertil Steril 2013;100-107.

28. Dahdouh E, Balayla J, Audibert F. Technical Update: Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis and Screening. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2015; 5:451-463.

29. 29.Harper J, Coonen E, De Rycke M, et al. What next for preimplantation genetic screening (PGS)? A position statement from the ESHRE PGD Consortium Steering Committee. Hum Reprod 2010; 4:821-823.

30. Munné S. Mosaicism: ‘‘survival of the fittest’’ versus ‘‘no embryo left behind’’. Fertil Steril, 2016;105:5:1146-1149.

31. Johnson DS, Cinnioglu C, Ross R, et al. Comprehensive analysis of karyotypic mosaicism between trophectoderm and inner cell mass. Mol Hum Reprod 2010; 16:944-949.

32. Fragouli E, Alfarawati S, Spath K, et al. The origin and impact of embryonic aneuploidy. Hum Genet 2013; 132:1001–1013.

33. Vera-Rodriguez M, Michel C, Mercader A. Distribution patterns of segmental aneuploidies in human blastocysts identified by next-generation sequencing. Fertil Steril 2016; 105:1047-1055.

34. Sánchez Usabiaga R, Ramírez Rivera EG, et al. Frecuencia de aneuploidias segmentarias en biopsias de trofoectodermo durante un ciclo de FIV y su relación con la edad materna. Ginercol Obstet Mex 2017; 8:510-518.

35. Yang Z, Lin J, Zhang J, et al. Randomized comparison of nextgeneration sequencing and array comparative genomic hybridization for preimplantation genetic screening: a pilot study. BMC Medical Genomics 2015; 8:1-13.

36. White PM. One for Sorrow, Two for Joy? American embryo transfer guideline recommendations, practices, and outcomes for gestational surrogate patients.J Assist Reprod Genet 2017;34:431-443.

37. Harbottle S, Hughes C, Cutting R, et al. Elective Single Embryo Transfer: an update to UK Best Practice Guidelines. Hum Fertil 2015; 18:165-183.

38. Hee J, Henderson S, Garcia E. Successful live birth after transfer of blastocyst and frozen blastocyst from rescue ICSI with application of polarized light microscopy for spindle examination on unfertilized eggs. J Ovarian Res. 2015; 8:22-26.

39. Gardner DK, Stevens J, Sheldon CB, et al. Analysis of blastocyst morphology. In: Elder K, Cohen J, editors. Human preimplantation embryo selection. London: Informa Healthcare; 2007. pp. 79–87

40. Gardner DK, Schoolcraft WB. Culture and transfer of human blastocysts. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 1999; 11:307-311.

41. Rodrigo L, Mateu E, Mercader A, et al. New tools for embryo selection: comprehensive chromosome screening by array comparative genomic hybridization. Biomed Res Int 2014; 2014:1-9.

42. Zegers-Hochschild F, Adamson GD, Dyer S, et al. The International Glossary on Infertility and Fertility Care, 2017. Fertil Steril 2017; S0015-0282(17)30429-6. Article in press.

43. Kuwayama M. Highly efficient vitrification for cryopreservation of human oocytes and embryos: the Cryotop method. Theriogenology 2007; 67:73-80.

44. Ebner T, Moser M, Sommergruber M, et al. Selection based on morphological assessment of oocytes and embryos at different stages of preimplantation development: a review. Hum Reprod Update 2003; 9:251-262.

45. Macklon NS, Geraedts JP, Fauser BC. Conception to ongoing pregnancy: the ‘black box’ of early pregnancy loss. Hum Reprod Update 2002; 8:333-343.

46. Wilton L. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidy screening in early human embryos: a review. Prenat Diagn 2002; 22:512-518.

47. Martinez MC, Mendez C, Ferro J, et al. Cytogenetic analysis of early nonviable pregnancies after assisted reproduction treatment. Fertil Steril 2010; 93:289-292.