4.4 Article

Correlation analysis of human embryo LeY glycan antigen expression and embryo quality

期刊

EXPERIMENTAL AND THERAPEUTIC MEDICINE
卷 14, 期 1, 页码 159-162

出版社

SPANDIDOS PUBL LTD
DOI: 10.3892/etm.2017.4495

关键词

embryo; Le(Y) glycan; in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer; embryo quality

资金

  1. National Natural Scientific Grants, China [31570798, 30970464]
  2. Liaoning Province Natural Science Foundation of China [2014023055]
  3. Program for Professor of Special Appointment in Liaoning Province

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study assessed the feasibility of using Le(Y) glycan secretion level in human embryos as a method of judging embryo quality. Embryo culture media from patients receiving in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer was collected, and quality scores of embryos were recorded. Secretions of Le(Y) in the culture media in different development stages (from 4-cell to 10-cell), embryos in the same development stage of the same patients (8-cell/I) and embryos in the same development stage of different patients (8-cell/I) were examined by dot-blot. Embryos were divided into a hypersecretion group and hyposecretion group, based on their Le(Y) secretion level. The embryo quality was evaluated by clinical observations, the number which developed to D3 cell stage and the number of successful embryo transplantations. Le(Y) secretion increased as embryos developed from 4-cell to 10-cell (P<0.05); secretion of Le(Y) of 8/I is not identical; development speed of embryos with different secretion level of Le(Y) was also different. The number of embryos which developed to 6-cell or higher was 82.2% in the Le(Y) hypersecretion group but only 60% in the hyposecretion group. The rate of successful transplantation was significantly higher in the hypersecretion group (71.1 vs. 40%). In conclusion, Le(Y) glycan secretion level in human embryos is closely related to embryo quality. Le(Y) may become a useful measure to evaluate embryo quality in the future.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据