4.7 Article

Cleavage anomalies in early human embryos and survival after prolonged culture in-vitro

期刊

HUMAN REPRODUCTION
卷 15, 期 12, 页码 2634-2643

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/humrep/15.12.2634

关键词

blastocyst; cleavage rate; fragmentation degree; fragmentation pattern; multinucleation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study examines the relationship between common morphological anomalies of cleaving embryos and their ability to form apparently normal blastocysts in vitro. The impact of cleavage rate, fragmentation, and multinucleation on compaction, cavitation, along with inner cell mass and trophectoderm formation has been assessed. The study population consisted of 102 patients who elected or were selected to have a day 5 embryo transfer, Clinical pregnancy and implantation rates were 66.7 and 49% respectively, Slow and fast cleavage had a significant negative association with normal blastocyst formation. Only 13.8% (67/484) of embryos with <7 cells and 27.5% (25/91) of those with >9 cells on day 3 formed blastocysts with apparently normal morphology, compared to 41.9% (252/602) with 7-9 cells on day 3 (P < 0,001), Fragmentation had a negative impact on normal blastocyst formation. Embryos with >15% fragmentation formed normal blastocysts at a significantly lower rate (46/279; 16.5%) than embryos with 0-15% fragmentation (311/935; 33.3%) (P < 0.001). Furthermore, the pattern of fragmentation was associated with blastocyst formation, Type IV fragmentation led to a significant reduction in blastocyst formation (25/170 or 14.7%), compared to types I, II and III which performed much better (38,6, 32.9 and 32.4% respectively), Only 15.9% (22/138) of embryos with one or more multinucleate cells on day 2 and/or 3 formed normal blastocysts compared with 31.9% (335/1051) (P < 0.001) of those without multinucleation, Collectively, the data suggest that cleavage anomalies, some of which do not preclude development after short-term culture, may reduce the developmental competence of embryos after prolonged culture.

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