Elucidating the origin of chromosomal aberrations in IVF embryos by preimplantation genetic analysis

Tsvia Frumkin, Mira Malcov, Yuval Yaron, Dalit Ben-Yosef*

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

32 Scopus citations

Abstract

Preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) has been proposed as a method for improving success rates in patients with repeated IVF failures. This approach is based on the hypothesis that such failures are the result of aneuploid embryos. It has been suggested that FISH analysis of blastomeres removed from preimplantation embryos represent the chromosomal constitution of the entire embryo. However, it is not yet clear whether it also represents the chromosomal constitution of the implanted embryo. PGS reanalysis on day 5 of embryos designated as "aneuploid" on day 3 may demonstrate a high rate of mosaicism for chromosomal aberration. Some of these mosaic embryos are capable of developing into normal embryos by "self-correction". Others, however, may accumulate additional chromosomal anomalies. It is therefore concluded that the chromosomal constitution of a preimplantation embryo may evolve during early cleavages. Meiotic and post zygotic mitotic errors may account for these chromosomal aberrations. This review will focus on elucidating the origin of chromosomal changes during preimplantation embryo development by studying their chromosomal constitution at different stages.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)112-119
Number of pages8
JournalMolecular and Cellular Endocrinology
Volume282
Issue number1-2
DOIs
StatePublished - 30 Jan 2008
Externally publishedYes

Keywords

  • Aneuploidy
  • Fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH)
  • Meiotic errors
  • Mitotic errors
  • Mosaicism
  • Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD)/screening (PGS)
  • Self-correction

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Elucidating the origin of chromosomal aberrations in IVF embryos by preimplantation genetic analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this