Abstract
Introduction
Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) is widely used for women heterozygous for a Robertsonian translocation. Preconceptional diagnosis (PCD), performed before fertilization, may be an alternative to PGD, especially in countries where PGD is restricted or prohibited, as in France. It could also give different information and clarify the influence of reproductive and obstetric history.
Methods
In our study, translocation was diagnosed before ICSI in five cases (group A), and after newborn or fetal aneuploidy or miscarriage in two cases, (group B).
Results
First polar body (PB1) analysis using acrocentric centromeric probes was done for 85 PB1s, and aneuploidy rate was at 42.4%. Oocyte aneuploidy rate differed (p < 0.0001) between groups A and B (30% vs 84%). Despite the small group sizes, we demonstrate a correlation (p = 0.0358) of aneuploidy rate in polar bodies after 2 or more attempts. Three live births were recorded, all in group A.
Discussion
PCD could thus be an alternative to PGD. This pilot study also provides new prognostic information taking into account the women’s natural history, but further confirmation is required.
References
Nielsen J, Wohlert M. Chromosome abnormalities found among 34,910 newborn children: results from a 13-year incidence study in Arhus. Denmark. Hum Genet 1991;87(1):81–3. doi:10.1007/BF01213097.
Verlinsky Y, Tur-kaspa I, Cieslak J, Bernal A, Morris R, Taranissi M, et al. Preimplantation testing for chromosomal disorders improves reproductive outcome of poor-prognosis patients. Reprod Biomed Online 2005;11(2):219–25.
Goossens V, Harton G, Moutou C, Scriven PN, Traeger-Synoclino J, Sermon K, et al. ESHRE PGD Consortium data collection VIII: cycles from January to December 2005 with pregnancy follow-up to October 2006. Hum Reprod, 2008.
Vialard F, Hammoud I, Molina GD, Wainer R, Bergere M, Albert M, et al. Gamete cytogenetic study in couples with implantation failure: aneuploidy rate is increased in both couple members. J Assist Reprod Genet 2008;25(11–12):539–45. doi:10.1007/s10815-008-9258-6.
Vialard F, Lombroso R, Bergere M, Molina GD, Hammoud I, Bailly M, et al. Oocyte aneuploidy mechanisms are different in two situations of increased chromosomal risk: older patients and patients with recurrent implantation failure after in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 2007;87(6):1333–9. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2006.11.042.
Montag M, van der Ven K, Dorn C, van der Ven H, et al. Outcome of laser-assisted polar body biopsy and aneuploidy testing. Reprod Biomed Online 2004;9(4):425–9.
Moradkhani K, Puechberty J, Bhatt S, Lespinasse J, Vag P, Lefort G, et al. Rare Robertsonian translocations and meiotic behaviour: sperm FISH analysis of t(13;15) and t(14;15) translocations: a case report. Hum Reprod 2006;21(12):3193–8. doi:10.1093/humrep/del314.
Page SL, Shin JC, Han Jy, Choo KH, Shaffer LG et al. Breakpoint diversity illustrates distinct mechanisms for Robertsonian translocation formation. Hum Mol Genet 1996;5(9):1279–88. doi:10.1093/hmg/5.9.1279.
Munne S. Analysis of chromosome segregation during preimplantation genetic diagnosis in both male and female translocation heterozygotes. Cytogenet Genome Res 2005;111(3–4):305–9. doi:10.1159/000086904.
Scriven PN, Flinter FA, Braude PR, Ogilvie CM, et al. Robertsonian translocations–reproductive risks and indications for preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Hum Reprod 2001;16(11):2267–73. doi:10.1093/humrep/16.11.2267.
Durban M, Benet J, Boada M, Fernandez E, Calafell JM, Lailla JM, et al. PGD in female carriers of balanced Robertsonian and reciprocal translocations by first polar body analysis. Hum Reprod Update 2001;7(6):591–602. doi:10.1093/humupd/7.6.591.
Pujol A, Durban M, Benet J, Boiso I, Calafell JM, Egozcue J, Navarro J, et al. Multiple aneuploidies in the oocytes of balanced translocation carriers: a preimplantation genetic diagnosis study using first polar body. Reproduction 2003;126(6):701–11. doi:10.1530/rep.0.1260701.
Alves C, Sousa M, Silva J, Barros A, et al. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis using FISH for carriers of Robertsonian translocations: the Portuguese experience. Prenat Diagn 2002;22(12):1153–62. doi:10.1002/pd.503.
Vialard F, Gomes DM, Hammoud I, Bergere M, Wainer R, Bailly M, et al. Stability of aneuploidy rate in polar bodies in two cohorts from the same patient. Reprod Biomed Online 2008;17(2):213–9.
Ferraretti AP, Magli MC, Kopcow L, Gianaroli L, et al. Prognostic role of preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidy in assisted reproductive technology outcome.. Hum Reprod 2004;19(3):694–9. doi:10.1093/humrep/deh121.
Munne S, Escudero T, Colls P, Xuezhong Z, Oter M, Garrisi M, et al. Predictability of preimplantation genetic diagnosis of aneuploidy and translocations on prospective attempts. Reprod Biomed Online 2004;9(6):645–51.
Engels H, Eggermann T, Caliebe A, Jelska A, Schubert R, Schuler HM, et al. Genetic counseling in Robertsonian translocations der(13;14): frequencies of reproductive outcomes and infertility in 101 pedigrees. Am J Med Genet A 2008;146A(20):2611–6. doi:10.1002/ajmg.a.32500.
Otani T, et al. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis significantly improves the pregnancy outcome of translocation carriers with a history of recurrent miscarriage and unsuccessful pregnancies. Reprod Biomed Online 2006;13(6):869–74.
Sugiura-Ogasawara M, Suzumori K. Can preimplantation genetic diagnosis improve success rates in recurrent aborters with translocations? Hum Reprod 2005;20(12):3267–70. doi:10.1093/humrep/dei259.
Harris DJ, Hankins L, Begleiter ML. Reproductive risk of t(13q14q) carriers: case report and review. Am J Med Genet 1979;3(2):175–81. doi:10.1002/ajmg.1320030208.
Boue A, Gallano P. A collaborative study of the segregation of inherited chromosome structural rearrangements in 1356 prenatal diagnoses. Prenat Diagn 1984;4(Spec No):45–67. doi:10.1002/pd.1970040705.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Molina Gomes, D., Hammoud, I., Bailly, M. et al. Preconceptional diagnosis for Robertsonian translocation as an alternative to preimplantation genetic diagnosis in two situations: a pilot study. J Assist Reprod Genet 26, 113–117 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-009-9293-y
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-009-9293-y