2010, Number 1
<< Back Next >>
Perinatol Reprod Hum 2010; 24 (1)
Standardization of the sampling and culturing procedures for cytogenetic study from first-trimester-of-gestation a bortion tissues
Castro-Llamas J, Llano-Rivas I, Aguinaga-Ríos M, Ibáñez-Salvador JC, Segundo-Juan JM, Beltrán-Montoya JJ, Moreno-Verduzco ER, González-Estrada AJ, Domínguez-Castro M
Language: Spanish
References: 32
Page: 20-27
PDF size: 267.12 Kb.
ABSTRACT
Objective: The aim of this work was to standardize the reception, selection, and systematic culture techniques of first-trimester-of-gestation abortion tissues in order to perform the cytogenetic analysis.
Material and methods: Cultures obtained from villi from products of conception were used. Results obtained by using the previous routine technique and the current proposed one were compared. The following adaptations were done: 1) Timing and collection media for the tissues of abortion, 2) Selection procedure of the tissue to be evaluated (villi or amniotic membranes), 3) Sterility tests on culture medium supplemented with antibiotics, and 4) Maceration of the selected tissue.
Results: A statistically significant difference was found in the rate of success of culture growth of tissues cultured with the current proposed technique compared to the previous routine one (OR = 0.54; CI 95% [0.33 – 0.89]; p ‹ .05). We could increase the number of tissues processed from 165 samples in 12 years with the previous routine technique to 155 in one year with the current proposed one. A statistically significant difference was also found between sexes with the current proposed technique compared to the previous routine one, with a decrease of 46,XX karyotypes (OR = 4.5; CI 95% [2.66-7.64]; p ‹ .05).
Conclusions: We could standardize the collection and selection of the samples, and also the tissue culture procedures with the present work. Furthermore, we got a better success rate (30%) in our abnormal cultures; although a lower success rate (54.8%) with the current proposed technique compared to the previous routine one (69%) was observed.
REFERENCES
Boue J, Bou A, Lazar P. Retrospective and prospective epidemiological studies of 1,500 karyotyped spontaneous human abortions. Teratology 1975; 12: 11-26.
Guerneri S, Betti D, Simoni G, Brambati B, Lanzani A, Fraccaro M. Prevalence and distribution of chromosome abnormalities in a sample of first trimester internal abortions. Hum Reprod 1987; 2: 735-39.
Eiben B, Bartels I, Bahr-Porsch S, Borgmann S, Batz G, Gellert G et al. Cytogenetic analysis of 750 spontaneous abortions with the direct-preparation method of chorionic villi and its implications for studying genetic causes of pregnancy wastage. Am J Hum Genet 1990; 47: 656-63.
Strom CM, Ginsberg N, Applebaum M Bozorgi N, Shite M Caffarelli M et al. Analyses of 95 first-trimester spontaneous abortions by chorionic villus sampling and karyotype. J Assist Reprod Genet 1992; 9: 458-61.
Sánchez JM, Franzi L, Collia F, De Diaz SL, Panal M, Dubner M. Cytogenetic study of spontaneous abortions by transabdominal villus sampling and direct analysis of villi. Prenat Diagn 1999; 19: 601-3.
Philipp T, Phillip K, Reiner A, Beer F, Kolousek DK. Embryoscopic and cytogenetic analysis of 233 missed abortions: factors involved in the pathogenesis of developmental defects of early failed pregnancies. Hum Reprod 2003; 18: 1724-32.
Menasha J, Levy B, Hirschhorn K, Kardon N. Incidence and spectrum of chromosome abnormalities in spontaneous abortions: New insights from a 12-year study. Genet Med 2005: 7 (4): 251-63.
Kajji T, Ferrier A, Niikawa N, Takahara H, Ohama K, Avirachan S. Anatomic and chromosomal anomalies in 639 spontaneous abortuses. Hum Genet 1980; 55: 87-98.
Hassold T, Chen N, Funkhouser J, Jooss T, Manuerl B, Matsuura J et al. A cytogenetic study of 1,000 spontaneous abortions. Ann Hum Genet 1980; 44: 151-78.
Warburton D, Stein Z, Kline J, Susser M. Chromosome abnormalities in spontaneous abortion: Data from the New York City study. In: Porter IH, Hook EB, editors. Embryonic and fetal death. New York: Academic Press; 1980. p. 261-83.
Hassold T, Chiu D. Maternal age-specific rates of numerical chromosome abnormalities with special reference to trisomy. Hum Genet 1985; 70: 11-17.
Linn CC, De Braekeleer M, Jamro H. Cytogenetic studies in spontaneous abortion: the Calgary experience. Can J Genet Cytol 1985; 27: 565-70.
Kline J, Stein Z. Epidemiology of chromosomal anomalies in spontaneous abortion: prevalence, manifestation and determinants. In: Bennett MJ, Edmonds DK, editors. Spontaneous and Recurrent Abortion. Chicago: Oxford Blackwell Scientific 1987.p.29-50.
Dejmek J, Vojtassak J, Malova J. Cytogenetic analysis of 1,508 spontaneous abortions originating from South Slovakia. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 1992; 46: 129-36.
Hassold T, Abruzzo M, Adkins K, Griffin D, Merril M, Millie E et al. Human aneuploidy: incidence, origin, and etiology. Environ Mol Mutagen1996; 28: 167-75.
Dunn TM, Grunfeld L, Dardon NB. Trisomy 1 in a clinically recognized IVF pregnancy. Am J Med Genet 2001; 99: 152-53.
Hanna JS, Shires P, Matile G. Trisomy 1 in a clinically recognized pregnancy. Am J Med Genet 1997; 68: 98.
Goddijn M, Joosten JHK, Knegt AC, Van der Veen F, Franssen MTM, Bonsel GJ, Leschot NJ. Clinical relevance of diagnosis structural chromosome abnormalities in couples with repeated miscarriage. Hum Reprod 2004; 19: 1013-17.
Nicolaidis P, Petersen M. Origin of nondisjunction in human autosomal trisomies. Hum Reprod 1998; 13: 313-19.
Chandley AC. The origin of chromosomal aberrations in man and their potential for survival and reproduction in the adult human populations. Ann Benet 1981; 24: 5-11.
Jacobs PA, Hassold TJ. The origin of numerical chromosome abnormalities. Adv Genet 1995; 33: 101-33.
Rubio C, Simón C, Vidal F, Rodrigo L, Pehlivan T, Remohí J, Pellicer A. Chromosomal abnormalities and embryo development in recurrent miscarriage couples. Hum Reprod 2003; 18: 182-88.
Ogasawa M, Aoki K, Akada S, Suzumori K. Embrionic karyotype of abortuses in relation to the number of previous miscarriages. Fertility and Sterility 2000; 73: 300-4.
The ACT Cytogenetics Laboratory Manual. 2nd ed. Barch MJ, editor. The ACT cytogenetics laboratory manual. 2nd ed. New York: Raven Press; 1991: 107-149.
Wegner RD. Cytogenetic reliability of CVS: the German collaborative study in comparison to other multicenter studies. In: Sengel-Rutkowskis. Early prenatal diagnostics. Hamburg 1995.
Fritz B, Hallermann C, Olert J et al. Cytogenetic analysis of culture failures by comparative genomic hybridization (CGH): reevaluation of chromosome aberration rates in early spontaneous miscarriage. Eur J Hum Genet 2001; 9: 539-47.
Wang BB, Rubin CH, William J. Mosaicism in chorionic villus sampling: An analysis of incidence and chromosomes involved in 2,612 consecutive cases. Prenat Diagn 1993; 13: 179-90.
Henderson KG, Shaw TE, Barret IT et al. Distribution of mosaicism in human placentae. Hum Genet 1996; 97: 650-54.
Bell KA, Van Deerlin P, Haddad BR and Feinberg RF. Cytogenetic diagnosis of “normal 46,XX” karyotypes in spontaneous abortions frequently may be misleading. Fertility and Sterility 1999; 71: 334-41.
Lomax B, Tang S, Separovic E et al. Comparative genomic hybridization in combination with flow cytometry improves results of cytogenetic analysis of spontaneous miscarriage. Am J Hum Genet 2000; 66: 1516-21.
Jarret KL, Michaelis RC, Phelan MC, Vincent VA, Best RG. Microsatellite analysis reveals a high incidence of maternal cell contamination in 46,XX products of conception consisting of villi or a combination of villi and membranous material. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2001; 185: 198-203.
Zhang, YX, Zhanf YP, Gu Y et al. Genetic analysis of first-trimester miscarriages with a combination of cytogenetic karyotyping, microsatellite genotyping and array CGH. Clin Genet 2009; 75: 133-40.
Full text