Cargando…
The effects of differences in trophectoderm biopsy techniques and the number of cells collected for biopsy on next‐generation sequencing results
PURPOSE: To examine how differences in trophectoderm biopsy techniques affect the frequency of mosaic embryos and sequencing results. METHODS: We examined differences in next‐generation sequencing (NGS) analysis results among operators or according to biopsy technique. Additionally, we determined th...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9020563/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35475147 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/rmb2.12463 |
_version_ | 1784689581452427264 |
---|---|
author | Mizobe, Yamato Kuwatsuru, Yukari Kuroki, Yuko Fukumoto, Yumiko Tokudome, Mari Moewaki, Harue Watanabe, Mia Iwakawa, Tokiko Takeuchi, Kazuhiro |
author_facet | Mizobe, Yamato Kuwatsuru, Yukari Kuroki, Yuko Fukumoto, Yumiko Tokudome, Mari Moewaki, Harue Watanabe, Mia Iwakawa, Tokiko Takeuchi, Kazuhiro |
author_sort | Mizobe, Yamato |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: To examine how differences in trophectoderm biopsy techniques affect the frequency of mosaic embryos and sequencing results. METHODS: We examined differences in next‐generation sequencing (NGS) analysis results among operators or according to biopsy technique. Additionally, we determined the cut‐off for the number of collected cells to predict the occurrence of mosaicism. We collected cells according to the cut‐off value and examined whether there was a difference in the NGS analysis results between the pulling and flicking methods. RESULTS: There was no difference in the NGS analysis results among the operators. Regarding re‐biopsy, changes in the mosaic were observed in all specimens. The cut‐off value for the number of collected cells was five, and when more than five cells were collected, there was no difference in the NGS analysis results between the two methods. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that if trophectoderm biopsy techniques and NGS are stable, the cell collection location has a greater effect on NGS results than the biopsy technique. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9020563 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2022 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-90205632022-04-25 The effects of differences in trophectoderm biopsy techniques and the number of cells collected for biopsy on next‐generation sequencing results Mizobe, Yamato Kuwatsuru, Yukari Kuroki, Yuko Fukumoto, Yumiko Tokudome, Mari Moewaki, Harue Watanabe, Mia Iwakawa, Tokiko Takeuchi, Kazuhiro Reprod Med Biol Original Articles PURPOSE: To examine how differences in trophectoderm biopsy techniques affect the frequency of mosaic embryos and sequencing results. METHODS: We examined differences in next‐generation sequencing (NGS) analysis results among operators or according to biopsy technique. Additionally, we determined the cut‐off for the number of collected cells to predict the occurrence of mosaicism. We collected cells according to the cut‐off value and examined whether there was a difference in the NGS analysis results between the pulling and flicking methods. RESULTS: There was no difference in the NGS analysis results among the operators. Regarding re‐biopsy, changes in the mosaic were observed in all specimens. The cut‐off value for the number of collected cells was five, and when more than five cells were collected, there was no difference in the NGS analysis results between the two methods. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that if trophectoderm biopsy techniques and NGS are stable, the cell collection location has a greater effect on NGS results than the biopsy technique. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2022-04-20 /pmc/articles/PMC9020563/ /pubmed/35475147 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/rmb2.12463 Text en © 2022 The Authors. Reproductive Medicine and Biology published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Japan Society for Reproductive Medicine. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) License, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Mizobe, Yamato Kuwatsuru, Yukari Kuroki, Yuko Fukumoto, Yumiko Tokudome, Mari Moewaki, Harue Watanabe, Mia Iwakawa, Tokiko Takeuchi, Kazuhiro The effects of differences in trophectoderm biopsy techniques and the number of cells collected for biopsy on next‐generation sequencing results |
title | The effects of differences in trophectoderm biopsy techniques and the number of cells collected for biopsy on next‐generation sequencing results |
title_full | The effects of differences in trophectoderm biopsy techniques and the number of cells collected for biopsy on next‐generation sequencing results |
title_fullStr | The effects of differences in trophectoderm biopsy techniques and the number of cells collected for biopsy on next‐generation sequencing results |
title_full_unstemmed | The effects of differences in trophectoderm biopsy techniques and the number of cells collected for biopsy on next‐generation sequencing results |
title_short | The effects of differences in trophectoderm biopsy techniques and the number of cells collected for biopsy on next‐generation sequencing results |
title_sort | effects of differences in trophectoderm biopsy techniques and the number of cells collected for biopsy on next‐generation sequencing results |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9020563/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35475147 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/rmb2.12463 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT mizobeyamato theeffectsofdifferencesintrophectodermbiopsytechniquesandthenumberofcellscollectedforbiopsyonnextgenerationsequencingresults AT kuwatsuruyukari theeffectsofdifferencesintrophectodermbiopsytechniquesandthenumberofcellscollectedforbiopsyonnextgenerationsequencingresults AT kurokiyuko theeffectsofdifferencesintrophectodermbiopsytechniquesandthenumberofcellscollectedforbiopsyonnextgenerationsequencingresults AT fukumotoyumiko theeffectsofdifferencesintrophectodermbiopsytechniquesandthenumberofcellscollectedforbiopsyonnextgenerationsequencingresults AT tokudomemari theeffectsofdifferencesintrophectodermbiopsytechniquesandthenumberofcellscollectedforbiopsyonnextgenerationsequencingresults AT moewakiharue theeffectsofdifferencesintrophectodermbiopsytechniquesandthenumberofcellscollectedforbiopsyonnextgenerationsequencingresults AT watanabemia theeffectsofdifferencesintrophectodermbiopsytechniquesandthenumberofcellscollectedforbiopsyonnextgenerationsequencingresults AT iwakawatokiko theeffectsofdifferencesintrophectodermbiopsytechniquesandthenumberofcellscollectedforbiopsyonnextgenerationsequencingresults AT takeuchikazuhiro theeffectsofdifferencesintrophectodermbiopsytechniquesandthenumberofcellscollectedforbiopsyonnextgenerationsequencingresults AT mizobeyamato effectsofdifferencesintrophectodermbiopsytechniquesandthenumberofcellscollectedforbiopsyonnextgenerationsequencingresults AT kuwatsuruyukari effectsofdifferencesintrophectodermbiopsytechniquesandthenumberofcellscollectedforbiopsyonnextgenerationsequencingresults AT kurokiyuko effectsofdifferencesintrophectodermbiopsytechniquesandthenumberofcellscollectedforbiopsyonnextgenerationsequencingresults AT fukumotoyumiko effectsofdifferencesintrophectodermbiopsytechniquesandthenumberofcellscollectedforbiopsyonnextgenerationsequencingresults AT tokudomemari effectsofdifferencesintrophectodermbiopsytechniquesandthenumberofcellscollectedforbiopsyonnextgenerationsequencingresults AT moewakiharue effectsofdifferencesintrophectodermbiopsytechniquesandthenumberofcellscollectedforbiopsyonnextgenerationsequencingresults AT watanabemia effectsofdifferencesintrophectodermbiopsytechniquesandthenumberofcellscollectedforbiopsyonnextgenerationsequencingresults AT iwakawatokiko effectsofdifferencesintrophectodermbiopsytechniquesandthenumberofcellscollectedforbiopsyonnextgenerationsequencingresults AT takeuchikazuhiro effectsofdifferencesintrophectodermbiopsytechniquesandthenumberofcellscollectedforbiopsyonnextgenerationsequencingresults |