Embryo selection strategy in sibling oocytes: A novel approach to measuring the likelihood of single‑embryo transfer using a mouse embryo transfer model

Xu,Feng-Qin; Liu,Rong; Ma,Ying; Liu,Li; Liang,Ju-Yan; Ma,Yan

doi:10.3892/mmr.2014.1998

Embryo selection strategy in sibling oocytes: A novel approach to measuring the likelihood of single‑embryo transfer using a mouse embryo transfer model

Authors:
- Feng-Qin Xu
- Rong Liu
- Ying Ma
- Li Liu
- Ju-Yan Liang
- Yan Ma
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Center of Reproductive Medicine, Tianjin First Central Hospital, Tianjin 300312, P.R. China
Published online on: February 28, 2014 https://doi.org/10.3892/mmr.2014.1998
Pages: 1952-1958

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

The present study investigated the effect of embryo transfer on post-implantation development using different fertilization approaches in sibling oocyte procedures. C57BL/6, DBA/2, C3H/HeJ and ICR mice were used at 8-10 weeks of age. Mature oocytes were collected, divided into two groups and fertilized using in vitro fertilization (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). Different numbers of the resulting blastocysts were then transferred into recipients and designated as either: The single embryo transfer (SET) I model (one transferred embryo), the SET II model (six transferred embryos) or the multiple embryo transfer (MET) model (24 transferred embryos). The development efficiency, cell number, number of apoptotic cells in blastocysts, pregnancy efficiency, delivery rate and cumulative pregnancy efficiency were analyzed. IVF-fertilized embryos exhibited higher blastocyst development competence and embryo quality compared with ICSI embryos. The pregnancy and delivery efficiency was not identified to be significantly different between the two SET models, but it was lower in these two models than in the MET model. The cumulative pregnancy efficiency in SET models, calculated using a mathematical equation, was not decreased. In conclusion, embryo quality was shown to be the primary factor in selecting embryos prior to embryo transfer using sibling oocytes. In addition, single blastocyst transfer can be performed in sibling oocytes without compromising cumulative pregnancy rates, independent of the fertilization approach.

View Figures

View References

1	Steptoe PC and Edwards RG: Birth after the reimplantation of a human embryo. Lancet. 2:3661978. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
2	Palermo G, Joris H, Devroey P and Van Steirteghem AC: Pregnancies after intracytoplasmic injection of single spermatozoon into an oocyte. Lancet. 340:17–18. 1992. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
3	Handyside AH, Kontogianni EH, Hardy K and Winston RM: Pregnancies from biopsied human preimplantation embryos sexed by Y-specific DNA amplification. Nature. 344:768–770. 1990. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
4	Calderón G, Belil I, Aran B, et al: Intracytoplasmic sperm injection versus conventional in-vitro fertilization: first results. Hum Reprod. 10:2835–2839. 1995.PubMed/NCBI
5	Li Z, Lin H, Xiao W and Wang Y: Fertilization of IVF/ICSI using sibling oocytes from couples with subfertile male or unexplained infertility. J Huazhong Univ Sci Technolog Med Sci. 24:365–368. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
6	Elizur SE, Levron J, Seidman DS, et al: Conventional in vitro fertilization versus intracytoplasmic sperm injection for sibling oocytes in couples with mild oligoteratoasthenozoospermia and couples with normal sperm. Fertil Steril. 82:241–243. 2004.
7	van der Westerlaken L, Naaktgeboren N, Verburg H, et al: Conventional in vitro fertilization versus intracytoplasmic sperm injection in patients with borderline semen: a randomized study using sibling oocytes. Fertil Steril. 85:395–400. 2006.
8	Fan W, Li SW, Li L, et al: Outcome of conventional IVF and ICSI on sibling oocytes in the case of isolated teratozoospermia. J Assist Reprod Genet. 29:905–910. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
9	Hwang JL, Seow KM, Lin YH, et al: IVF versus ICSI in sibling oocytes from patients with polycystic ovarian syndrome: a randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod. 20:1261–1265. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
10	Staessen C, Camus M, Clasen K, et al: Conventional in-vitro fertilization versus intracytoplasmic sperm injection in sibling oocytes from couples with tubal infertility and normozoospermic semen. Hum Reprod. 14:2474–2479. 1999. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
11	Shveiky D, Simon A, Gino H, et al: Sibling oocyte submission to IVF and ICSI in unexplained infertility patients: a potential assay for gamete quality. Reprod Biomed Online. 12:371–374. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
12	Plachot M, Belaisch-Allart J, Mayenga JM, et al: Outcome of conventional IVF and ICSI on sibling oocytes in mild male factor infertility. Hum Reprod. 17:362–369. 2002. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
13	Becker B, Bertrand E, Van Hoeck J, et al: Outcome of conventional IVF and ICSI on sibling oocytes in patients suffering from teratospermia. Int J Fertil Womens Med. 51:163–169. 2006.PubMed/NCBI
14	Kihaile PE, Misumi J, Hirotsuru K, et al: Comparison of sibling oocyte outcomes after intracytoplasmic sperm injection and in vitro fertilization in severe teratozoospermic patients in the first cycle. Int J Androl. 26:57–62. 2003. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
15	Marsh CA, Farr SL, Chang J, et al: Trends and factors associated with the Day 5 embryo transfer, assisted reproductive technology surveillance, USA, 2001–2009. Hum Reprod. 27:2325–2331. 2012.PubMed/NCBI
16	Thurin A, Hausken J, Hillensjö T, et al: Elective single-embryo transfer versus double-embryo transfer in in vitro fertilization. N Engl J Med. 351:2392–2402. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
17	Gardner DK, Surrey E, Minjarez D, et al: Single blastocyst transfer: a prospective randomized trial. Fertil Steril. 81:551–555. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
18	Uyar A, Torrealday S and Seli E: Cumulus and granulosa cell markers of oocyte and embryo quality. Fertil Steril. 99:979–997. 2013. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
19	Fragouli E and Wells D: Aneuploidy screening for embryo selection. Semin Reprod Med. 30:289–301. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar
20	Yu Y, Ding C, Wang E, et al: Piezo-assisted nuclear transfer affects cloning efficiency and may cause apoptosis. Reproduction. 133:947–954. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
21	Feng C, Wang LQ, Dong MY and Huang HF: Assisted reproductive technology may increase clinical mutation detection in male offspring. Fertil Steril. 90:92–96. 2008. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
22	Yu Y, Zhao C, Lv Z, et al: Microinjection manipulation resulted in the increased apoptosis of spermatocytes in testes from intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) derived mice. PLoS One. 6:e221722011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
23	Griffiths TA, Murdoch AP and Herbert M: Embryonic development in vitro is compromised by the ICSI procedure. Hum Reprod. 15:1592–1596. 2000.
24	Van Soom A, Vanroose G and de Kruif A: Blastocyst evaluation by means of differential staining: a practical approach. Reprod Domest Anim. 36:29–35. 2001.PubMed/NCBI
25	Lane M and Gardner DK: Increase in postimplantation development of cultured mouse embryos by amino acids and induction of fetal retardation and exencephaly by ammonium ions. J Reprod Fertil. 102:305–312. 1994. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
26	Cao YJ, Fan XJ, Shen Z, et al: Nitric oxide affects preimplantation embryonic development in a rotating wall vessel bioreactor simulating microgravity. Cell Biol Int. 31:24–29. 2007. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
27	Xie Y, Puscheck EE and Rappolee DA: Effects of SAPK/JNK inhibitors on preimplantation mouse embryo development are influenced greatly by the amount of stress induced by the media. Mol Hum Reprod. 12:217–224. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
28	Kimura Y and Yanagimachi R: Intracytoplasmic sperm injection in the mouse. Biol Reprod. 52:709–720. 1995. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
29	Bhattacharya S, Hamilton MP, Shaaban M, et al: Conventional in-vitro fertilisation versus intracytoplasmic sperm injection for the treatment of non-male-factor infertility: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 357:2075–2079. 2001. View Article : Google Scholar
30	La Sala GB, Nucera G, Gallinelli A, et al: Spontaneous embryonic loss after in vitro fertilization with and without intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Fertil Steril. 82:1536–1539. 2004.
31	Hourvitz A, Lerner-Geva L, Elizur SE, et al: Role of embryo quality in predicting early pregnancy loss following assisted reproductive technology. Reprod Biomed Online. 13:504–509. 2006. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
32	Pandian Z, Templeton A, Serour G and Bhattacharya S: Number of embryos for transfer after IVF and ICSI: a Cochrane review. Hum Reprod. 20:2681–2687. 2005. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
33	Gerris J: Single-embryo transfer versus multiple-embryo transfer. Reprod Biomed Online. 18(Suppl 2): 63–70. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
34	Veleva Z, Vilska S, Hydén-Granskog C, et al: Elective single embryo transfer in women aged 36–39 years. Hum Reprod. 21:2098–2102. 2006.
35	Montag M, Koll B, Holmes P and van der Ven: Significance of the number of embryonic cells and the state of the zona pellucida for hatching of mouse blastocysts in vitro versus in vivo. Biol Reprod. 62:1738–1744. 2000. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
36	Desai NN, Goldstein J, Rowland DY and Goldfarb JM: Morphological evaluation of human embryos and derivation of an embryo quality scoring system specific for day 3 embryos: a preliminary study. Hum Reprod. 15:2190–2196. 2000. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
37	Wang YA, Sullivan EA, Healy DL and Black DA: Perinatal outcomes after assisted reproductive technology treatment in Australia and New Zealand: single versus double embryo transfer. Med J Aust. 190:234–237. 2009.PubMed/NCBI
38	Rodríguez Barredo DB, Tur Padro R, Mancini F, Parriego García M, Rodríguez García I, Coroleu Lletget B and Barri Rague PN: Elective single embryo transfer and cumulative pregnancy rate: five-year experience in a Southern European Country. Gynecol Endocrinol. 28:425–428. 2012.PubMed/NCBI
39	Gebhardt KM, Feil DK, Dunning KR, et al: Human cumulus cell gene expression as a biomarker of pregnancy outcome after single embryo transfer. Fertil Steril. 96:47–52. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
40	McKenzie LJ, Pangas SA, Carson SA, et al: Human cumulus granulosa cell gene expression: a predictor of fertilization and embryo selection in women undergoing IVF. Hum Reprod. 19:2869–2874. 2004. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
41	Garrido N, Bellver J, Remohí J, et al: Cumulative newborn rates increase with the total number of transferred embryos according to an analysis of 15,792 ovum donation cycles. Fertil Steril. 98:341–346. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
42	Garrido N, Bellver J, Remohí J, et al: Cumulative live-birth rates per total number of embryos needed to reach newborn in consecutive in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles: a new approach to measuring the likelihood of IVF success. Fertil Steril. 96:40–46. 2011. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
43	Luke B, Brown MB, Wantman E, et al: Cumulative birth rates with linked assisted reproductive technology cycles. N Engl J Med. 366:2483–2491. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
44	Malizia BA, Hacker MR and Penzias AS: Cumulative live-birth rates after in vitro fertilization. N Engl J Med. 360:236–243. 2009. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI
45	Lannon BM, Choi B, Hacker MR, et al: Predicting personalized multiple birth risks after in vitro fertilization-double embryo transfer. Fertil Steril. 98:69–76. 2012. View Article : Google Scholar : PubMed/NCBI