4.7 Article

Incidence and development of zygotes exhibiting abnormal pronuclear disposition after identification of two pronuclei at the fertilization check

Journal

FERTILITY AND STERILITY
Volume 94, Issue 3, Pages 965-970

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.04.018

Keywords

Unipronuclear; 1PN; tripronuclear; 3PN; early cleavage; IVF; ICSI; zygote

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To determine the incidence, developmental potential, and clinical implications of embryos having one pronucleus (1PN) or three pronuclei (3PN) at early cleavage, despite exhibiting 2PN at the fertilization check. Design: Retrospective cohort study. Setting: Hospital-based academic medical center. Patient(s): All IVF cycles from January 2006 through May 2008 having 2PN zygotes that subsequently transitioned to 1PN or 3PN before cleavage, matched to cycles having 2PN zygotes progressing to cleavage without intervening abnormal pronuclear disposition. Intervention(s): Standard IVF protocol. Main Outcome Measure(s): Incidence, day 3 development, and implantation rates of 2PN zygotes transitioning to 1PN and 3PN states before cleavage, compared with normal embryos. Result(s): The incidences of 1PN and 3PN zygotes were 2.9% and 0.4%, respectively. Both types of abnormal zygote showed slower day 3 cleavage, although only the 1PNs exhibited higher fragmentation and asymmetry compared with controls. The 1PN zygotes had a 6.4% implantation rate and viable pregnancy rate of 1.3%. Of the nine 3PN zygotes transferred, none implanted. Conclusion(s): Two-pronuclear zygotes transitioning through 1PN or 3PN states tend to develop into poorer-quality embryos than 2PN control zygotes. Patients should be counseled regarding the very low likelihood of viable pregnancy after transfer of these abnormally developing zygotes. (Fertil Steril (R) 2010; 94: 965-70. (c) 2010 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available