Cargando…
Pre‐implantation genetic testing: Past, present, future
BACKGROUND: Pre‐implantation genetic testing (PGT) has been performed worldwide since it was first used by Handyside et al in the United Kingdom to sex embryos in 1990. Until about 2010, cleavage stage embryo biopsy and fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) were mainstream; however, in 2012, blas...
Autor principal: | |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2020
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7812490/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33488281 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/rmb2.12352 |
_version_ | 1783637679550758912 |
---|---|
author | Takeuchi, Kazuhiro |
author_facet | Takeuchi, Kazuhiro |
author_sort | Takeuchi, Kazuhiro |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Pre‐implantation genetic testing (PGT) has been performed worldwide since it was first used by Handyside et al in the United Kingdom to sex embryos in 1990. Until about 2010, cleavage stage embryo biopsy and fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) were mainstream; however, in 2012, blastocyst biopsy (trophectoderm; TE biopsy) became mainstream. In addition, array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) was used for analysis and further evolved to next‐generation sequencing (NGS), which is used worldwide. METHODS: PGT for reciprocal balanced translocation and Robertsonian translocation (PGT‐SR) was approved in Japan for habitual abortion to reduce pregnancy loss, and since 2008, we have been performing PGT‐SR using cleavage stage embryos and FISH. In 2014, we performed TE biopsy and NGS analysis. MAIN FINDINGS: In this paper, I separately described the details of our methods and clinical results of FISH and NGS. NGS is superior to FISH because it can detect all chromosomes. CONCLUSION: TE biopsy and NGS, which have recently become mainstream, have stable outcomes, because TE biopsy yields more cells and fewer mosaics than the cleavage stage. As a result, diagnoses are more reliable, resulting in higher pregnancy rates and lower abortion rates. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-7812490 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2020 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-78124902021-01-22 Pre‐implantation genetic testing: Past, present, future Takeuchi, Kazuhiro Reprod Med Biol Mini Reviews BACKGROUND: Pre‐implantation genetic testing (PGT) has been performed worldwide since it was first used by Handyside et al in the United Kingdom to sex embryos in 1990. Until about 2010, cleavage stage embryo biopsy and fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) were mainstream; however, in 2012, blastocyst biopsy (trophectoderm; TE biopsy) became mainstream. In addition, array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) was used for analysis and further evolved to next‐generation sequencing (NGS), which is used worldwide. METHODS: PGT for reciprocal balanced translocation and Robertsonian translocation (PGT‐SR) was approved in Japan for habitual abortion to reduce pregnancy loss, and since 2008, we have been performing PGT‐SR using cleavage stage embryos and FISH. In 2014, we performed TE biopsy and NGS analysis. MAIN FINDINGS: In this paper, I separately described the details of our methods and clinical results of FISH and NGS. NGS is superior to FISH because it can detect all chromosomes. CONCLUSION: TE biopsy and NGS, which have recently become mainstream, have stable outcomes, because TE biopsy yields more cells and fewer mosaics than the cleavage stage. As a result, diagnoses are more reliable, resulting in higher pregnancy rates and lower abortion rates. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2020-10-13 /pmc/articles/PMC7812490/ /pubmed/33488281 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/rmb2.12352 Text en © 2020 The Authors. Reproductive Medicine and Biology published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Japan Society for Reproductive Medicine. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Mini Reviews Takeuchi, Kazuhiro Pre‐implantation genetic testing: Past, present, future |
title | Pre‐implantation genetic testing: Past, present, future |
title_full | Pre‐implantation genetic testing: Past, present, future |
title_fullStr | Pre‐implantation genetic testing: Past, present, future |
title_full_unstemmed | Pre‐implantation genetic testing: Past, present, future |
title_short | Pre‐implantation genetic testing: Past, present, future |
title_sort | pre‐implantation genetic testing: past, present, future |
topic | Mini Reviews |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7812490/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33488281 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/rmb2.12352 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT takeuchikazuhiro preimplantationgenetictestingpastpresentfuture |