Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Rates of live birth after mosaic embryo transfer compared with euploid embryo transfer

  • Assisted Reproduction Technologies
  • Published:
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Mosaicism is a prevalent characteristic of human preimplantation embryos. This retrospective cohort study aimed to investigate pregnancy outcomes after transfer of mosaic or euploid embryos.

Methods

The embryos, which had been transferred as “euploidy,” were processed using array-based comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH). The original aCGH charts of the transferred embryos were reanalyzed. Mosaic and control euploid embryos were defined according to log2 ratio calls.

Results

Overall, 102 embryos were determined to be mosaic, of which 101 were estimated to harbor no more than 50% aneuploid mosaicism. Additionally, 268 euploid embryos were matched as controls. The rates of live birth (46.6% vs. 59.1%, odds ratio (OR) 0.60, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.38–0.95), and biochemical pregnancy (65.7% vs. 76.1%, OR 0.60, 95% CI 0.37–0.99) per transfer cycle were significantly lower after mosaic embryo transfer than after euploid embryo transfer. The rates of clinical pregnancy and pregnancy loss and the risks of obstetric outcomes did not differ significantly between the two groups.

Conclusions

Compared with euploid embryo transfer, mosaic embryo transfer is associated with a lower rate of live birth, which is mainly attributed to a decreased rate of conception. However, as mosaic embryo transfer yielded a live birth rate of 46.6%, patients without euploid embryos could be counseled regarding this alternative option.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Taylor TH, Gitlin SA, Patrick JL, Crain JL, Wilson JM, Griffin DK. The origin, mechanisms, incidence and clinical consequences of chromosomal mosaicism in humans. Hum Reprod Update. 2014;20(4):571–81. https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmu016.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Delhanty JD, Griffin DK, Handyside AH, Harper J, Atkinson GH, Pieters MH, et al. Detection of aneuploidy and chromosomal mosaicism in human embryos during preimplantation sex determination by fluorescent in situ hybridisation (FISH). Hum Mol Genet. 1993;2(8):1183–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Munne S, Weier HU, Grifo J, Cohen J. Chromosome mosaicism in human embryos. Biol Reprod. 1994;51(3):373–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. McCoy RC. Mosaicism in preimplantation human embryos: when chromosomal abnormalities are the norm. Trends Genet. 2017;33(7):448–63. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tig.2017.04.001.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Delhanty JD, Harper JC, Ao A, Handyside AH, Winston RM. Multicolour FISH detects frequent chromosomal mosaicism and chaotic division in normal preimplantation embryos from fertile patients. Hum Genet. 1997;99(6):755–60.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Evsikov S, Verlinsky Y. Mosaicism in the inner cell mass of human blastocysts. Hum Reprod. 1998;13(11):3151–5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Magli MC, Jones GM, Gras L, Gianaroli L, Korman I, Trounson AO. Chromosome mosaicism in day 3 aneuploid embryos that develop to morphologically normal blastocysts in vitro. Hum Reprod. 2000;15(8):1781–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Capalbo A, Wright G, Elliott T, Ubaldi FM, Rienzi L, Nagy ZP. FISH reanalysis of inner cell mass and trophectoderm samples of previously array-CGH screened blastocysts shows high accuracy of diagnosis and no major diagnostic impact of mosaicism at the blastocyst stage. Hum Reprod. 2013;28(8):2298–307. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/det245.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Bielanska M, Tan SL, Ao A. High rate of mixoploidy among human blastocysts cultured in vitro. Fertil Steril. 2002;78(6):1248–53.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Vorsanova SG, Kolotii AD, Iourov IY, Monakhov VV, Kirillova EA, Soloviev IV, et al. Evidence for high frequency of chromosomal mosaicism in spontaneous abortions revealed by interphase FISH analysis. J Histochem Cytochem. 2005;53(3):375–80. https://doi.org/10.1369/jhc.4A6424.2005.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Forsberg LA, Gisselsson D, Dumanski JP. Mosaicism in health and disease—clones picking up speed. Nat Rev Genet. 2017;18(2):128–42. https://doi.org/10.1038/nrg.2016.145.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Simon C. Introduction: to transfer or not transfera mosaic embryo, that is the question. Fertil Steril. 2017;107(5):1083–4. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.03.025.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Maxwell SM, Colls P, Hodes-Wertz B, DH MC, McCaffrey C, Wells D, et al. Why do euploid embryos miscarry? A case-control study comparing the rate of aneuploidy within presumed euploid embryos that resulted in miscarriage or live birth using next-generation sequencing. Fertil Steril. 2016;106(6):1414–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.08.017.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Gutierrez-Mateo C, Colls P, Sanchez-Garcia J, Escudero T, Prates R, Ketterson K, et al. Validation of microarray comparative genomic hybridization for comprehensive chromosome analysis of embryos. Fertil Steril. 2011;95(3):953–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.09.010.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Yang Z, Liu J, Collins GS, Salem SA, Liu X, Lyle SS, et al. 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. Mol Cytogenet. 2012;5(1):24. https://doi.org/10.1186/1755-8166-5-24.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  16. Sermon K, Capalbo A, Cohen J, Coonen E, De Rycke M, De Vos A, et al. The why, the how and the when of PGS 2.0: current practices and expert opinions of fertility specialists, molecular biologists, and embryologists. Mol Hum Reprod. 2016;22(8):845–57. https://doi.org/10.1093/molehr/gaw034.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Fiorentino F, Spizzichino L, Bono S, Biricik A, Kokkali G, Rienzi L, et al. PGD for reciprocal and Robertsonian translocations using array comparative genomic hybridization. Hum Reprod. 2011;26(7):1925–35. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/der082.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Alfarawati S, Fragouli E, Colls P, Wells D. First births after preimplantation genetic diagnosis of structural chromosome abnormalities using comparative genomic hybridization and microarray analysis. Hum Reprod. 2011;26(6):1560–74. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/der068.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Franasiak JM, Scott RT Jr. Embryonic aneuploidy: overcoming molecular genetics challenges improves outcomes and changes practice patterns. Trends Mol Med. 2014;20(9):499–508. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molmed.2014.06.006.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Colls P, Escudero T, Fischer J, Cekleniak NA, Ben-Ozer S, Meyer B, et al. Validation of array comparative genome hybridization for diagnosis of translocations in preimplantation human embryos. Reprod BioMed Online. 2012;24(6):621–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2012.02.006.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Greco E, Minasi MG, Fiorentino F. Healthy babies after intrauterine transfer of mosaic aneuploid blastocysts. N Engl J Med. 2015;373(21):2089–90. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMc1500421.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Fragouli E, Alfarawati S, Spath K, Babariya D, Tarozzi N, Borini A, et al. Analysis of implantation and ongoing pregnancy rates following the transfer of mosaic diploid-aneuploid blastocysts. Hum Genet. 2017;136(7):805–19. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00439-017-1797-4.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Munne S, Blazek J, Large M, Martinez-Ortiz PA, Nisson H, Liu E, et al. Detailed investigation into the cytogenetic constitution and pregnancy outcome of replacing mosaic blastocysts detected with the use of high-resolution next-generation sequencing. Fertil Steril. 2017;108(1):62–71.e8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.05.002.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Spinella F, Fiorentino F, Biricik A, Bono S, Ruberti A, Cotroneo E, et al. Extent of chromosomal mosaicism influences the clinical outcome of in vitro fertilization treatments. Fertil Steril. 2018;109(1):77–83. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.09.025.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Zhang Q, Li G, Zhang L, Sun X, Zhang D, Lu J et al. Maternal common variant rs2305957 spanning PLK4 is associated with blastocyst formation and early recurrent miscarriage. Fertil Steril 2017;107(4):1034–40 e5. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.01.006, 1040.e5.

  26. Gardner DK, Lane M, Stevens J, Schlenker T, Schoolcraft WB. Blastocyst score affects implantation and pregnancy outcome: towards a single blastocyst transfer. Fertil Steril. 2000;73(6):1155–8. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0015-0282(00)00518-5.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Lledo B, Morales R, Ortiz JA, Blanca H, Ten J, Llacer J, et al. Implantation potential of mosaic embryos. Syst Biol Reprod Med. 2017;63(3):206–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/19396368.2017.1296045.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Garrisi G, Walmsley RH, Bauckman K, Mendola RJ, Colls P, Munne S. Discordance among serial biopsies of mosaic embryos. Fertil Steril. 2016;106((3):e151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.07.447.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Durrbaum M, Kuznetsova AY, Passerini V, Stingele S, Stoehr G, Storchova Z. Unique features of the transcriptional response to model aneuploidy in human cells. BMC Genomics. 2014;15:139. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2164-15-139.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Williams BR, Prabhu VR, Hunter KE, Glazier CM, Whittaker CA, Housman DE, et al. Aneuploidy affects proliferation and spontaneous immortalization in mammalian cells. Science. 2008;322(5902):703–9. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1160058.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  31. Lavon N, Narwani K, Golan-Lev T, Buehler N, Hill D, Benvenisty N. Derivation of euploid human embryonic stem cells from aneuploid embryos. Stem Cells. 2008;26(7):1874–82. https://doi.org/10.1634/stemcells.2008-0156.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Bolton H, Graham SJ, Van der Aa N, Kumar P, Theunis K, Fernandez Gallardo E, et al. Mouse model of chromosome mosaicism reveals lineage-specific depletion of aneuploid cells and normal developmental potential. Nat Commun. 2016;7:11165. https://doi.org/10.1038/ncomms11165.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Capalbo A, Rienzi L. Mosaicism between trophectoderm and inner cell mass. Fertil Steril. 2017;107(5):1098–106. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.03.023.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Marin D, Scott RT Jr, Treff NR. Preimplantation embryonic mosaicism: origin, consequences and the reliability of comprehensive chromosome screening. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2017;29(3):168–74. https://doi.org/10.1097/GCO.0000000000000358.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Popovic M, Dheedene A, Christodoulou C, Taelman J, Dhaenens L, Van Nieuwerburgh F, et al. Chromosomal mosaicism in human blastocysts: the ultimate challenge of preimplantation genetic testing? Hum Reprod. 2018;33(7):1342–54. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dey106.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Gleicher N, Metzger J, Croft G, Kushnir VA, Albertini DF, Barad DH. A single trophectoderm biopsy at blastocyst stage is mathematically unable to determine embryo ploidy accurately enough for clinical use. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2017;15(1):33. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12958-017-0251-8.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  37. Capalbo A, Ubaldi FM, Rienzi L, Scott R, Treff N. Detecting mosaicism in trophectoderm biopsies: current challenges and future possibilities. Hum Reprod. 2017;32(3):492–8. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dew250.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Segawa T, Kuroda T, Kato K, Kuroda M, Omi K, Miyauchi O, et al. Cytogenetic analysis of the retained products of conception after missed abortion following blastocyst transfer: a retrospective, large-scale, single-centre study. Reprod BioMed Online. 2017;34(2):203–10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2016.11.005.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Malvestiti F, Agrati C, Grimi B, Pompilii E, Izzi C, Martinoni L, et al. Interpreting mosaicism in chorionic villi: results of a monocentric series of 1001 mosaics in chorionic villi with follow-up amniocentesis. Prenat Diagn. 2015;35(11):1117–27. https://doi.org/10.1002/pd.4656.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Munne S, Grifo J, Wells D. Mosaicism: “survival of the fittest” versus “no embryo left behind”. Fertil Steril. 2016;105(5):1146–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.01.016.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Fiorentino F, Biricik A, Bono S, Spizzichino L, Cotroneo E, Cottone G, et al. Development and validation of a next-generation sequencing-based protocol for 24-chromosome aneuploidy screening of embryos. Fertil Steril. 2014;101(5):1375–82. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.01.051.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Yang Z, Lin J, Zhang J, Fong WI, Li P, Zhao R, et al. Randomized comparison of next-generation sequencing and array comparative genomic hybridization for preimplantation genetic screening: a pilot study. BMC Med Genet. 2015;8:30. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12920-015-0110-4.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors expressed thanks to Wenjie Jiang, Hongqiang Xie, Hongchang Li, and Ping Li from Reproductive Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University for performing PGT procedures and following up.

Funding

This study was funded by the National Key Research and Development Program of China (grant number 2016YFC1000202), National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant number 81671522), and Innovative Foundation of Reproductive Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University (grant number 20171114).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Reproductive Medicine, Shandong Provincial Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University, Jingliu Road 157, Jinan, 250021, China

    Lei Zhang, Daimin Wei, Yueting Zhu, Yuan Gao, Junhao Yan & Zi-Jiang Chen

  2. National Research Center for Assisted Reproductive Technology and Reproductive Genetics, Jinan, China

    Lei Zhang, Daimin Wei, Yueting Zhu, Yuan Gao, Junhao Yan & Zi-Jiang Chen

  3. The Key Laboratory of Reproductive Endocrinology (Shandong University), Ministry of Education, Jinan, China

    Lei Zhang, Daimin Wei, Yueting Zhu, Yuan Gao, Junhao Yan & Zi-Jiang Chen

  4. Shandong Provincial Key Laboratory of Reproductive Medicine, Jinan, China

    Lei Zhang, Daimin Wei, Yueting Zhu, Yuan Gao, Junhao Yan & Zi-Jiang Chen

  5. Center for Reproductive Medicine, Ren Ji Hospital, School of Medicine, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Shanghai, China

    Zi-Jiang Chen

  6. Shanghai Key Laboratory for Assisted Reproduction and Reproductive Genetics, Shanghai, China

    Zi-Jiang Chen

Authors
  1. Lei Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Daimin Wei
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Yueting Zhu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Yuan Gao
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Junhao Yan
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Zi-Jiang Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Junhao Yan.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Electronic supplementary material

ESM 1

(DOCX 37 kb)

ESM 2

(DOCX 16 kb)

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Zhang, L., Wei, D., Zhu, Y. et al. Rates of live birth after mosaic embryo transfer compared with euploid embryo transfer. J Assist Reprod Genet 36, 165–172 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-018-1322-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-018-1322-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation