How can we nowadays select the best embryo to transfer?

被引:2
|
作者
Alter, L. [1 ]
Boitrelle, F. [1 ]
Sifer, C. [2 ]
机构
[1] CHI Poissy St Germainen Laye, Serv Histol Embryol Biol Reprod Cytogenet & Genet, F-78303 Poissy, France
[2] CHU Jean Verdier, Serv Biol Reprod, AP HP, F-93143 Bondy, France
来源
GYNECOLOGIE OBSTETRIQUE & FERTILITE | 2014年 / 42卷 / 7-8期
关键词
In vitro fertilization; Embryo morphology; eSET; Kinetic; Time-lapse; Preimplantation genetic diagnosis; Omics; IN-VITRO FERTILIZATION; ADVANCED MATERNAL AGE; CLINICAL PREGNANCY; EARLY CLEAVAGE; DELIVERY RATE; STAGE; WOMEN; IMPLANTATION; MORPHOLOGY; BIOPSY;
D O I
10.1016/j.gyobfe.2014.05.006
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
Multiple pregnancies stand as the most common adverse outcome of assisted reproduction technologies (ART) and the dangers associated with those pregnancies have been reduced by doing elective single embryo transfers (e-SET). Many studies have shown that e-SET is compatible with a continuously high pregnancy rate per embryo transfer. Yet, it still becomes necessary to improve the selection process in order to define the quality of individual embryos so that the ones we choose for transfer are more likely to implant. First, analysis of embryo morphology has greatly helped in this identification and remains the most relevant criterion for choosing the embryo. The introduction of time-lapse imaging provides new criteria predictive of implantation potential, but the real contribution of this system - including the benefit/cost ratio - seems to be not yet properly established. In this context, extended culture until blastocyst stage is an essential practice but it appears wise to keep it for a population showing a good prognosis. Then, the failure of aneuploid embryos to implant properly led to achieve preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) in order to increase pregnancy and delivery rates after ART. However, PGS by fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) at day 3 is a useless process - and may even be harmful. Another solution involves using comparative genomic hybridisation (CGH) and moving to blastocyst biopsy. Finally, it is envisaged that morphology will also be significantly aided by non-invasive analysis of biomarkers in the culture media that give a better reflection of whole-embryo physiology and function. (C) 2014 Published by Elsevier Masson SAS.
引用
收藏
页码:515 / 525
页数:11
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] The Best We Can Be
    Skolnik, Neil
    CIRCULATION, 2017, 136 (03) : 247 - 248
  • [42] As Best We Can
    Lloyd, Margaret
    STAND, 2021, 19 (02): : 118 - 119
  • [43] How can we select suitable patients for potentially harmful antithrombotic intervention?
    Goto, S.
    CARDIOLOGY, 2013, 126 : 228 - 228
  • [44] Evaluation methods of biomimetic development: how can we compare and select topics?
    Tachibana, Satoru
    Noguchi, Ryozo
    Miyasaka, Juro
    Ohdoi, Katsuaki
    BIOINSPIRED BIOMIMETIC AND NANOBIOMATERIALS, 2023, 12 (02) : 41 - 51
  • [45] Interhospital transfer: How can we get it right?
    Deakin, Anita
    Smith, Brendon
    EMERGENCY MEDICINE AUSTRALASIA, 2015, 27 (05) : 492 - 493
  • [46] 'WE DO THE BEST WE CAN'
    CANNON, J
    POETRY WALES, 1994, 30 (01): : 21 - 21
  • [47] Frster resonance energy transfer?what can we learn and how can we use it?
    Schneckenburger, Herbert
    METHODS AND APPLICATIONS IN FLUORESCENCE, 2020, 8 (01):
  • [48] Can we select for respect in academe?
    Walsh, Benjamin M.
    Kabat-Farr, Dana
    Matthews, Russell A.
    Schulte, Benjamin D.
    INDUSTRIAL AND ORGANIZATIONAL PSYCHOLOGY-PERSPECTIVES ON SCIENCE AND PRACTICE, 2019, 12 (04): : 405 - 407
  • [49] Clinical prioritisation questions: How can we best utilise them?
    Deshpande, Ankita
    MEDICAL TEACHER, 2020, 42 (10) : 1192 - 1192
  • [50] How Can We Best Think about an Emerging Technology? FOREWORD
    Kaebnick, Gregory E.
    Gusmano, Michael K.
    Murray, Thomas H.
    HASTINGS CENTER REPORT, 2014, 44 : S2 - S3