4.7 Article

Noninvasive assessment of human embryo nutrient consumption as a measure of developmental potential

期刊

FERTILITY AND STERILITY
卷 76, 期 6, 页码 1175-1180

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0015-0282(01)02888-6

关键词

ammonium; blastocyst; culture; embryo transfer; IVF. metabolism; viability

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To determine the relationship between blastocyst development and morphology and embryo metabolism. Design: Noninvasive assessment of carbohydrate uptake and ammonium production by individual embryos. Setting: Private assisted reproductive technology unit. Patient(s): Patients donated, with consent, cryopreserved pronucleate embryos and noncryopreserved blastocysts. Intervention(s): Culture of 60 thawed pronucleate embryos in sequential media to the blastocyst stage with concomitant noninvasive analysis of embryo metabolism and analysis of 13 blastocysts from noncryopreserved embryos. Main Outcome Measure(s): Pyruvate and glucose consumption as well as blastocyst formation and quality. Result(s): Pyruvate and glucose uptakes on day 4 were significantly higher by embryos that went on to form blastocysts than by embryos that failed to develop to the blastocyst stage. Glucose uptakes were greatest in those blastocysts of highest grade, whereas pyruvate uptakes were similar irrespective of blastocyst grade, indicating that glucose is the more important nutrient for the human blastocyst. Among blastocysts of the same grade from the same patient, there was considerable spread of glucose consumption, indicating that glucose consumption may be of use in identifying blastocysts for transfer. Ammonium production by individual embryos was also measured, reflecting amino acid transamination and use by the human embryo. Conclusion(s): The ability to identify in culture the embryo with the highest developmental potential will facilitate the move to single-embryo transfers. (Fertil Steril (R) 2001;76:1175-80. (C) 2001 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.).

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据