Skip to main content
Log in

Trends, Fads and ART!

  • Opinion
  • Published:
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Morphological selection techniques of gametes and embryos are of current interest to clinical practice in ART. Although intracytoplasmic morphologically selected sperm injection (IMSI), time lapse imaging morphometry (TLIM) or quantification of chromosome numbers (PGS) are potentially useful in research, they have not been shown to be of statistically predictive value and, thus, have only limited clinical usefulness. We make the point that morphological markers alone cannot predict the success of the early embryo, which depends on the correct orchestration of a myriad of physiological and biochemical activation events that progress independently of the maternal or zygotic genome. Since previous attempts to identify metabolic markers for embryo quality have failed and there is no evidence that the intrinsic nature of gametes and embryos can be improved in the laboratory, embryologists can only minimize environmental or operator induced damage while these cells are manipulated ex vivo.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Steptoe PC, Edwards RG. Birth after the re-implantation of a human embryo. Lancet. 1978;2:366–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Tarin JJ, Garcia-Perez MA, Cano A. Assisted reproductive technology results: why are live birth percentages so low. Mol Reprod Develop. 2014;81:568–83.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Patrizio P, Sakkas D. From oocyte to baby: a clinical evaluation of the biological efficiency of in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 2009;91:1061–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Dale B, Wilding M, Coppola G, Tosti E. How do spermatozoa activate oocytes? Reprod Biomed Online. 2010;21:1–3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Delage Y. Etudes experimentales chez les echinoderms. Arch Zool Exp Gen. 1901;9:285–326.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Elder K, Dale B. In vitro fertilization. 3rd ed. UK: Cambridge University Press; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Dale B. Fertilization in animals. London: Edward Arnold; 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Lange K, Gartzke J. F.actin based calcium signalling. A critical comparison with the current concept of Ca signalling. J Cell Physiol. 2006;209:270–87.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Wilding M, Dale B, Marino M, Di Matteo L, Alviggi G, De Placido G. Mitochondrial aggregation patterns and activity in human oocytes and pre-implantation embryos. Hum Reprod. 2001;16:909–17.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Wilding M, Coppola GF, De Icco F, Arenare L, DiMatteo L, Dale B. Maternal non-mendelian inheritance of a reduced lifespan. J Assit Reprod Gen. 2014;31:637–43.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Hamatani T, Falco G, Carter MG, et al. Age-associated alteration of gene expression patterns in mouse oocytes. Hum Mol Gen. 2004;13:2263–78.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Ménézo YJ. Paternal and maternal factors in preimplantation embryogenesis: interaction with the biochemical environment. Reprod Biomed Online. 2006;12:616–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Dale B, De Felice LJ, Ehrenstein G. Injection of a soluble sperm fraction into sea urchin eggs triggers the cortical reaction. Experientia. 1985;41:1068–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kashir J, Heindryckx B, Jones C, DeSutter P, Parrington J, Coward K. Oocyte activation, phospholipase Czeta and human infertility. Hum Reprod Update. 2010;16:690–703.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Tosti A, Dale B. Lithium and phorbol ester modify the activating capacity of ascidian spermatozoa. Experientia. 1992;48:57–60.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Dozortsev D, Qian C, Ermilov A, Rybouchkin A, De Sutter P, Dhont M. Sperm-associated oocyte-activating factor is released from the spermatozoon within 30 minutes after injection as a result of the sperm-oocyte interaction. Hum Reprod. 1997;12:2792–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Eid LN, Lorton SP, Parrish JJ. Paternal influence on S-phase in the first cell cycle of the bovine embryo. Biol Reprod. 1994;51:1232–7.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Ward F, Rizos D, Corridan D, Quinn K, Boland M, Lonergan P. Paternal influence on the time of first embryonic cleavage post insemination and the implications for subsequent bovine embryo development in vitro and fertility in vivo. Mol Reprod Dev. 2001;60:47–55.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Ménézo Y, Dale B. Paternal contribution to successful embryogenesis. Hum Reprod. 1995;10:1326–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Chun J, Limatola N, Vasilev F, Santella L. Early events of fertilization in sea urchin eggs are senditive to actin binding organic molecules. Biochem Biophs Res Comm. 2014. doi:10.1016/j.bbrc.2014.06.057.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Sutovsky P, Terada Y, Schatten G. Ubiquitin-based sperm assay for the diagnosis of male factor infertility. Hum Reprod. 2001;16:250–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Betts DH, Madan P. Permanent embryo arrest: molecular and cellular concepts. Mol Hum Reprod. 2008;14:445–53.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Sunkara SK, Rittenberg V, Raine-Fenning N, Bhattacharya S, Zamora J, Coomarasamy A. Association between the number of eggs and live birth in IVF treatment: an analysis of 400, 135 treatment cycles. Hum Reprod. 2011;26:1768–74.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Munne S, Ary J, Zouves C, Escudero T, Barnes F, Cinioglu C, et al. Wide range of chromosome abnormalities in the embryos of young donor eggs. Reprod Biomed Online. 2006;12:340–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Fragouli E, Alfarwati S, Spath K, Jaroudi S, Sarasa J, Enciso M, et al. The origin and impact of embryonic aneuploidy. Hum Gen. 2013;132:1001–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Mersereau JE, Plunkett BA, Cedars MI. Pre-implantation genetic screening in older women: a cost effectiveness analysis. Fertil Steril. 2008;90:592–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Mastenbroek S, Twisk M, Van der Veen F, Repping S. Pre-implantation genetic screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTS. Hum Reprod Update. 2011;17:454–66.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Mastenbroek S, Repping S. Preimplantation genetic screening: back to the future. Hum Reprod. 2014;29:1846–50.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Levin I, Almog B, Schwartz T, Gold V, Ben Yosef D, Shaubi M, et al. Effects of laser polar-body biopsy on embryo quality. Fert Steril. 2012;97:1085–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. De Vos A, Staesson C, De Rycke M, Verpoest W, Haentjens P, Devroey P, et al. Impact of cleavage stage embryo biopsy on human blastocyst implantation. A prospective cohort of single embryo transfers. Hum Reprod. 2009;24:2988–96.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Vanneste E, Voet T, Melotte C, Debrock S, Sermon K, Staesson C, et al. What next for pre-implantation genetic screening. High mitotic chromosome instability rate provides the biological basis for the low success rate. Hum Reprod. 2009;24:2679–82.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. King WA, Coppola G, Alexander B, Mastromonaco G, Perrault S, Nini-soto MI, et al. The impact of chromosomal alteration on embryo development. Theriogeneology. 2006;65:166–77.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Kirkegaard K, Kesmodel US, Hindkjaer JJ, Ingerslev HJ. Time lapse parameters as predictors of blastocyst development and pregnancy outcome in embryos from good prognosis patients: a prospective co-hort. Hum Reprod. 2013;28:2643–51.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Kirkegaard K, Cambell A, Agerholm I, Bentin Ley U, Gabrielson A, Kirk J, et al. Limitations of a time lapse blastocyt prediction model: a large multicentre outcome aanlysis. Reprod Med Online. 2014;29:156–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Stecher A, Vanderzwalmen P, Zintz M, Wirleitner B, Schuff M, Spitzer D, et al. Transfer of blastcysts with deviant morphological and morphokinetic parametes at early stages of in vitro development: a case series. Reprod Biomed Online. 2014;28:424–35.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Albertini D. When looks are deceiving: the challenge facing embryo quality prognosticators. J Assit Reprod Genetics. 2014;31:249–50.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Cohen J, Gilligan A, Esposito W, Schimmel T, Dale B. Ambient air and its potential effects on conception in vitro. Hum Reprod. 1997;12:1742–6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Takenaka M, Horiuchi T, Yanagamachi R. Effect of light on development of mammalian embryos. PNAS. 2007;104:14289–93.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Schultz RM. Of light and mouse embryos: less is more. PNAS. 2007;104:14547–8.

    Article  PubMed Central  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Martín-Romero FJ, Miguel-Lasobras EM, Domínguez-Arroyo JA, González-Carrera E, Alvarez IS. Contribution of culture media to oxidative stress and its effect on human oocytes. Reprod Biomed Online. 2008;17:652–61.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Bartoov B, Berkovitz A, Eltes F, Kogosovski A, Menezo Y, Barak Y. Real time morphology of motile human sperm cells is associated with IVF-ICSI outcome. J Androl. 2002;23:1–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Berkovitz A, Eltyes F, Ellenbogen A, Peer S, Feldberg D, Bartoov B. Does the presence of nuclear vacuoles in human sperm selected for ICSI affect pregnancy outcome? Hum Reprod. 2006;21:1787–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Bartoov B, Berkovitz A, Eltes F, Kogosovsky A, Yagoda A, Lederman H, et al. Pregnancy rates are higher with intracytoplasmic morphologically selected sperm injection than with conventional intracytoplasmic injection. Fert Steril. 2003;80:1413–29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. Wilding M, Coppola G, Di Matteo L, Palagiano A, Fusco E, Dale B. Intracytoplasmic injection of selected spermatozoa (IMSI improves outcome after assisted reproduction by deselecting physiologically poor quality spermatozoa. J Assit Reprod Genetics. 2011;28:253–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Tosti E, Menezo Y. IMSI, useful, useless or harmful. J Fert In vitro. 2012;4:1–2.

    Google Scholar 

  46. Palermo GD, Hu JCY, Rienzi L, Maggiulli R, Takeuchi T, et al. Thoughts on IMSI. In Biennial Review on Infertility. 2011;2:277–90.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Vergouw CG, Kieslinger DC, Kostelijk EH, Botros LL, Schats R, Hompes PG, et al. Day 3 embryo selection by metabolomics profiling of culture medium with near infra red spectroscopy as an adjunt to morphology: a randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod. 2012;27:2304–11.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Ménézo Y, Elder K, Viville S. Soluble HLA-G release by the human embryo: an interesting artefact. Reprod Biomed Online. 2006;13:763–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Roudebush WE, Wininger JD, Jones AE, Wright G, Toledo AA, Kort HI, et al. Embryonic platelet-activating factor: an indicator of embryo viability. Hum Reprod. 2002;17:1306–10.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Gardner DK, Lane M. Amino acids and ammonium regulate mouse embryo development in culture. Biol Reprod. 1993;48:377–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Menezo Y, Khatchadourian C, Gharib A, Hamidi J, Greenland T, Sarda N. Regulation of S-adenosyl methionine synthesis in the mouse embryo. Life Sci. 1989;44:1601–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Ménézo Y, Lichtblau I, Elder K. New insights into human pre-implantation metabolism in vivo and in vitro. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2013;30:293–303.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Ménézo Y, Mares P, Cohen M, Brack M, Viville S, Elder K. Autism, imprinting and epigenetic disorders: a metabolic syndrome linked to anomalies in homocysteine recycling starting in early life. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2011;28:1143–5.

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Anckaert E, Adriaenssens T, Romero S, Smitz J. Ammonium accumulation and use of mineral oil overlay do not alter imprinting establishment at three key imprinted genes in mouse oocytes grown and matured in a long-term follicle culture. Biol Reprod. 2009;81:666–73.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Ménézo YJ, Hérubel F. Mouse and bovine models for human IVF. Reprod Biomed Online. 2002;4:170–5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  56. Wang F, Kooistra M, Lee M, Liu L, Baltz JM. Mouse embryos stressed by physiological levels of osmolarity become arrested in the late 2-cell stage before entry into M phase. Biol Reprod. 2011;85:702–13.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. El-Maarri O, Buiting K, Peery EG, Kroisel PM, Balaban B, Wagner K, et al. Maternal methylation imprints on human chromosome 15 are established during or after fertilization. Nat Genetics. 2001;27:341–4.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Brian Dale.

Additional information

Capsule

This review discusses trends and fads in ART and, in particular, whether the morphological selection techniques, IMSI, TLIM or PGS, improve live birth rates.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Dale, B., Menezo, Y. & Coppola, G. Trends, Fads and ART!. J Assist Reprod Genet 32, 489–493 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-014-0420-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-014-0420-z

Keywords

Navigation