Cytogenetic causes of miscarriage induced in an in vitro fertilization program

Sinkov K.O.

Laboratory of Medical Genetics, ZAO Avicenna Medical Center, Novosibirsk, Russia

Motyreva P.Yu.

Laboratory of Medical Genetics, ZAO Avicenna Medical Center, Novosibirsk, Russia

Serkova M.V.

Laboratory of Medical Genetics, ZAO Avicenna Medical Center, Novosibirsk, Russia

Ustinov S.N.

Laboratory of Medical Genetics, ZAO Avicenna Medical Center, Novosibirsk, Russia

Aizikovich I.V.

Laboratory of Medical Genetics, ZAO Avicenna Medical Center, Novosibirsk, Russia

Cytogenetic causes of miscarriage induced in an in vitro fertilization program

Authors:

Sinkov K.O., Motyreva P.Yu., Serkova M.V., Ustinov S.N., Aizikovich I.V.

More about the authors

Journal: Russian Bulletin of Obstetrician-Gynecologist. 2016;16(1): 4‑9

DOI: 10.17116/rosakush20161614-9

Downloaded: 11

Download PDF (RU)

Contact the author

Table of contents

To cite this article:

Sinkov KO, Motyreva PYu, Serkova MV, Ustinov SN, Aizikovich IV. Cytogenetic causes of miscarriage induced in an in vitro fertilization program. Russian Bulletin of Obstetrician-Gynecologist. 2016;16(1):4‑9. (In Russ.)
https://doi.org/10.17116/rosakush20161614-9

Подписка 2025-2 (Russian Bulletin of Obstetrician-Gynecologist)

Close metadata

Objective — to determine the prevalence of chromosomal abnormalities among good- and excellent-quality embryos and to reveal a correlation between morphological embryo quality assessment and a karyotype abnormality in abortion material. Material and methods. 76 samples from the abortion material obtained during non-developing vitro fertilization (IVF) pregnancies and 157 similar samples obtained during uterine cavity curettage for non-developing spontaneous pregnancies in 2012 to 2015 were analyzed. Chromosome specimens were prepared using a direct material processing method. The specimens were stained with GTG banding. The quality of embryos in the IVF cycles resulting in a miscarriage (n=133) or the birth of a healthy baby (n=97) was taken into account. Results. The proportion of chromosomal abnormalities in the abortion samples after non-developing IVF pregnancies was 43%. That after non-developing spontaneous pregnancies was considerably higher (68%). There were no significant differences the quality of embryos transferred in cases of non-developing IVF pregnancies and in those of IVF pregnancies resulting in the birth of a healthy baby. Conclusion. Karyotyping the samples of abortion material during non-developing pregnancy can reveal one of the genetic causes of miscarriage that accounted for nearly half of the cases, indicating the importance of carrying out this analysis. To choose embryos for transfer only according to morphological criteria does not need to lead to the birth of a healthy baby: the investigation revealed no significant differences in the quality of transferred embryos in successful and unsuccessful IVF cycles. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis may be performed to obtain additional information on embryo quality. The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Keywords:

non-developing pregnancy

aneuploidies

karyotype

genetic counseling

morphological criteria for embryo quality

preimplantation genetic diagnosis

Authors:

Sinkov K.O.

Laboratory of Medical Genetics, ZAO Avicenna Medical Center, Novosibirsk, Russia

Motyreva P.Yu.

Laboratory of Medical Genetics, ZAO Avicenna Medical Center, Novosibirsk, Russia

Serkova M.V.

Laboratory of Medical Genetics, ZAO Avicenna Medical Center, Novosibirsk, Russia

Ustinov S.N.

Laboratory of Medical Genetics, ZAO Avicenna Medical Center, Novosibirsk, Russia

Aizikovich I.V.

Laboratory of Medical Genetics, ZAO Avicenna Medical Center, Novosibirsk, Russia

List of references:

Hassold TJ. A cytogenetic study of repeated spontaneous abortions. The American Journal of Human Genetics. 1980;32:723-730; PMCID: PMC1686106.
Bettio D, Venci A, Levi Setti, PE. Chromosomal abnormalities in miscarriages after different assisted reproduction procedures. Placenta. 2008;29:126-128. doi: 10.1016/j.placenta.2008.08.015.
Radzinskii VE, Zapertova EYu, Misnik VV. Genetic and immunologic aspects of habitual abortion. Akusherstvo i ginekologiya. 2005;6:24-29. (In Russ.).
Viaggi CD, Cavani S, Malacarne M, Floriddia F, Zerega G, Baldo C, Mogni M, Castagnetta M, Piombo G, Coviello D-A, Camandona F, Lijoi D, Insegno W, Traversa M, Pierluigi M. First-trimester euploid miscarriages analysed by array-CGH. Journal of Applied Genetics. 2013;54:3:353-359. doi: 10.1007/s13353-013-0157-x.
Stephenson M, Kutteh W. Evaluation and management of recurrent early pregnancy loss. Clinical Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2007;50:1:132-145. doi: 10.1097/grf.0b013e31802f1c28.
Qin J-Z, Pang L-H, Li M-Q, Xu J, Zhou X. Risk of chromosomal abnormalities in early spontaneous abortion after assisted reproductive technology: A Metaanalysis. PLoS ONE. 2013;8:10:e75953. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0075953.
Alfarawati S, Fragouli E, Colls P, Stevens J, Gutiérrez-Mateo C, Schoolcraft WB, Katz-Jaffe MG, Wells D. The relationship between blastocyst morphology, chromosomal abnormality, and embryo gender. Fertility and Sterility. 2011;95:2:520-524. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.04.003.
Fragouli E, Alfarawati S, Daphnis DD, Goodall N, Mania A, Griffiths T, Gordon A, Wells D. Cytogenetic analysis of human blastocysts with the use of FISH, CGH and aCGH: scientific data and technical evaluation. Human Reproduction. 2010;26:2:480-490. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deq344.
Montag M, Liebenthron J, Köster M. Which morphological scoring system is relevant in human embryo development? Placenta. 2011;32:S252-S256. doi: 10.1016/j.placenta.2011.07.009.
Moayeri SE, Allen RB, Brewster WR, Kim MH, Porto M, Werlin LB. Day-3 embryo morphology predicts euploidy among older subjects. Fertility and Sterility. 2008;89:1:118-123. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.01.169.
Magli MC, Gianaroli L, Ferraretti AP, Lappi M, Ruberti A, Farfalli V. Embryo morphology and development are dependent on the chromosomal complement. Fertility and Sterility. 2007;87:3:534-541. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2006.07.1512.
Hardarson T. A morphological and chromosomal study of blastocysts developing from morphologically suboptimal human pre-embryos compared with control blastocysts. Human Reproduction. 2003;18:2:399-407. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deg092.
Munné S. Chromosome abnormalities and their relationship to morphology and development of human embryos. Reproductive BioMedicine Online. 2006;12:2:234-253. doi: 10.1016/s1472-6483(10)60866-8.
Eaton JL, Hacker MR, Harris D, Thornton KL, Penzias AS. Assessment of day-3 morphology and euploidy for individual chromosomes in embryos that develop to the blastocyst stage. Fertility and Sterility. 2009;91:6:2432-2436. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.03.008.
Bromer JG, Seli E. Assessment of embryo viability in assisted reproductive technology: shortcomings of current approaches and the emerging role of metabolomics. Current Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynecology. 2008;20:3:234-241. doi: 10.1097/gco.0b013e3282fe723d.
Wells D. Comprehensive chromosomal analysis of human preimplantation embryos using whole genome amplification and single cell comparative genomic hybridization. Molecular Human Reproduction. 2000;6:11:1055-1062. doi: 10.1093/molehr/6.11.1055.
Nayak S, Pavone ME, Milad M, Kazer R. Aneuploidy Rates in Failed Pregnancies Following Assisted Reproductive Technology. Journal of Women’s Health. 2011;20:8:1239-1243. doi: 10.1089/jwh.2010.2648.
Scott RT, Ferry K, Su J, Tao X, Scott K, Treff NR. Comprehensive chromosome screening is highly predictive of the reproductive potential of human embryos: a prospective, blinded, nonselection study. Fertility and Sterility. 2012;97:4:870-875. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.01.104.
Nagaoka SI, Hassold TJ, Hunt PA. Human aneuploidy: mechanisms and new insights into an age-old problem. Nature Reviews Genetics. 2012;13:7:493-504. doi: 10.1038/nrg3245.
Murugappan G, Gustin S, Lathi RB. Separation of miscarriage tissue from maternal decidua for chromosome analysis. Fertility and Sterility. 2014;102:4:e9-e10. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.07.006.
Gardner DK. Development of serum-free media for the culture and transfer of human blastocysts. Human Reproduction. 1998;13:(suppl 4):218-225. doi: 10.1093/humrep/13.suppl_4.218.
Gardner DK, Schoolcraft WB. Culture and transfer of human blastocysts. Current Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynaecology. 1999;11:3:307-311. doi: 10.1097/00001703-199906000-00013.
Pendina AA, Efimova OA, Chiryaeva OG, Tikhonov AV, Petrova LI, Dudkina VS, Sadik NA, Fedorova ID, Galembo IA, Kuznetzova TV, Gzgzyan AM, Baranov VS. A comparative cytogenetic study of miscarriages after IVF and natural conception in women aged under and over 35 years. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics. 2013;31:2: 149-155. doi: 10.1007/s10815-013-0148-1.
Mastenbroek S, Twisk M, van Echten-Arends J, Sikkema-Raddatz B, Korevaar J, Verhoeve H. In Vitro Fertilization With Preimplantation Genetic Screening. Obstetrical Gynecological Survey. 2007;62:11:728-730. doi: 10.1097/01.ogx.0000286813.19113.94.
Harton G, Braude P, Lashwood A, Schmutzler A, Traeger-Synodinos J, Wilton L, Harper JC. ESHRE PGD consortium best practice guidelines for organization of a PGD centre for PGD/preimplantation genetic screening. Human Reproduction. 2010;26:1:14-24. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deq229.
Yang Z, Liu J, Collins G, Salem S, Liu X, Lyle S. Selection of single blastocysts for fresh transfer via standard morphology assessment alone and with array CGH for good prognosis IVF patients: results from a randomized pilot study. Molecular Cytogenetics. 2012;5:1:24.
Fiorentino F, Biricik A, Bono S, Spizzichino L, Cotroneo E, Cottone G. Development and validation of a next-generation sequencing–based protocol for 24-chromosome aneuploidy screening of embryos. Fertility and Sterility. 2014;101:5:1375-1382.e2. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.01.051.

Close metadata