Username


Password

Forgot Password?

Preview

Sign-in free and Explore the Exciting World of BiomedExperts:
  • Over 1.500.000 Profiles
  • More than 1.800 Organizations worldwide
  • State of the Art Network Visualizations
  • Manage your own Profile
  • Locate Experts in your Country/Region
  • Locate Experts in your 1. and 2. Level Network
  • Connect to Experts Worldwide

find experts for

Sign-in to see more
2007: Mantzouratou A; Mania A; Fragouli E; Xanthopoulou L; Tashkandi S; Fordham K; Ranieri D M; Doshi A; Nuttall S; Harper J C; Serhal P; Delhanty J D A
Variable aneuploidy mechanisms in embryos from couples with poor reproductive histories undergoing preimplantation genetic screening.
Human reproduction (Oxford, England) 2007;22(7):1844-53.
BACKGROUND: Preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) is used to determine the chromosome status of human embryos from patients with advanced maternal age (AMA), recurrent miscarriage (RM) or repeated implantation failure (RIF). METHODS: Embryos from 47 such couples were investigated for chromosomes 13, 15, 16, 18, 21 and 22 using fluorescence in situ hybridization with two rounds of hybridization. The investigation included parental lymphocyte work-up, the screening of blastomeres on day 3 and full follow-up on day 5/6 of untransferred embryos. RESULTS: The outcome of 60 PGS cycles is described, in which 523 embryos were biopsied; 91% gave results, of which 18% were diploid for all the chromosomes tested and 82% were abnormal. The pregnancy rate per cycle that reached the biopsy stage was 27%, and 30% per embryo transfer. Satisfactory follow-up was obtained from 353 embryos; all those diagnosed as abnormal were confirmed as such, although two false-positives were detected in relation to specific chromosome abnormalities. Meiotic errors were identified in 16% of embryos. Between the RM, AMA and RIF groups, there was a significant difference in the distribution of embryos that were uniformly abnormal and of those with meiotic errors; with an almost 3-fold increase in meiotic errors in the first two groups compared with the RIF group. CONCLUSIONS: This complete investigation has identified significant differences between referral groups concerning the origin of aneuploidy in their embryos.

Post to CiteULike

Sign in free and see...

Visualized networks:
See your personal network in
sophisticated graphical views
GeoTargeted Searches:
Locate experts around the world
and connect with global collaborators
Research Profiles:
See the visualized research activity
of experts around the globe
Sign-in to see more