CGH Embryo Selection: Early Embryo Biopsy & Metaphase CGH versus Blastocyst Biopsy & Array CGH
702-892-9696
Fax:
702-892-9666
Within the past several months, there have been a number of news reports and press releases on embryo selection methods that enable evaluation of all 23 pairs of chromosomes in the embryo. Indeed, the identification of “competent” embryos requires that all 23 pairs of chromosomes be identified and accounted for. The “gold standard” for achieving this is through performance of Comparative Genomic Hybridization (CGH) a genetic test performed on DNA extracted from the egg polar body (PB), from a single blastomere taken from the early cleaved embryo 3 days post-fertilization, or from multiple cells biopsied from the trophectoderm (TE) of the blastocyst (Day 5-6 advanced embryo that has >100 cells).
As many of you who are familiar with our published research at SIRM are aware, we have been performing CGH embryo selection for nearly 4 years and have been offering it to our patients as a standard IVF option since 2007. There are two different types of CGH currently available:
1) Metaphase CGH (mCGH)
2) Array CGH (aCGH).
I’d like to offer a comparison of these two methods.
First: While mCGH can readily be performed on a single cell, aCGH (at its present state of development), requires a much larger sample of DNA in order to be reliable. That is why several cells must be removed from the blastocyst TE for testing by the aCGH method. This requirement serves to explain why aCGH, an analysis that is much simpler to perform than mCGH, is at present best used on blastocysts where multiple cells are available for biopsy and not on a 6-9 cell, day 3 embryo where the removal of >1 blastomere might be harmful. Thus, at present, mCGH which can reliably be performed on DNA taken from a single blastomere is still the only reliable method by which to evaluate for all the presence of all the chromosomes in early, cleaved, day-3 embryos.
Second: aCGH provides no more information than does metaphase CGH (mCGH).
Third: concerns the issue of mosaicism (mitotic aneuploidy) where some cells are aneuploid and others are not. Recall that aCGH needs to be performed on advanced embryos (blastocysts) because it requires a larger amount of DNA (i.e., several cells). Since almost all blastocysts have some degree of mosaicism, the question arises as to what percentage of the blastocyst’s cells need to be chromosomally normal in order for it to be capable of developing into a healthy baby. The truth is that no one knows! There have simply been too few births to make that determination. We are thus still in the “speculative phase” when it comes to knowing what percentage of aCGH tested TE cells need to be normal versus abnormal in order to safely transfer that embryo.
Fourth: TE biopsy removes cells for CGH testing from an area known as the trophectoderm (TE) which ultimately develops into the placenta. It is however a different part of the blastocyst known as the inner cell mass (ICM) which develops into the baby and this area of the trophoblast is not tested. Presently, we have no way of knowing whether the percentage of normal versus aneuploid cells detected in the TE is reflective of the same ratio in the ICM.
Our first publication on CGH (Fertility & Sterility, May 2007) demonstrated a clear linear propagation of chromosomal configuration from the pre-fertilized egg through the zygote (1 day post fertilization) to the cleaved (divided) day 3 embryo. Based upon results reported in this study as well as on as yet unpublished data, we have been able to confirm that the presence of aneuploidy in a day 3 embryo almost invariably proves lethal to that embryo. It follows that aneuploidy was due to abnormal meiosis and not due to mitotic dysfunction in these cases.
Presently (and probably for the foreseeable future), mCGH analysis of DNA derived from a single blastomere (removed from a day 3 embryo) is still the preferred method by which to identify the embryo that is most capable of propagating a normal pregnancy following IVF/ET. It is both possible and iondeed likely that as improvements take place in aCGH technology, it will become reliable for use in single cell analysis.
4 Responses to “CGH Embryo Selection: Early Embryo Biopsy & Metaphase CGH versus Blastocyst Biopsy & Array CGH”
Leave a Reply
Top Search Terms for In Vitro Fertilization
- Embryo Quality & Embryo “Competence” – Part III – Testing the Seed
- Embryo Quality & Embryo “Competence” – Part One: Planting a Good Seed
- The Needle vs. the Dish: Should ICSI Be Used in All IVF?
- Embryo Implantation: What Farmers Can Teach us About Growing Healthy Babies
- Acupuncture and IVF: Does it Improve Success?
Ask Our DoctorsA Question














Dr. Sher:
Are you aware of any labs or clinics in Utah that offer CGH testing? I have “unexplained infertility,” with 2 failed IVFs in a row; both chemical pregnancies ending in miscarriage.
I am guessing my doctor will have us go through PGA and also test for IID and other stuff you educate us about in your blog so would like to know if there may be some local options. Thanks for your response.
I just don’t know but if there are, they are certainly quite new at it.
Feel free to call and set up a free medical telephone consultation with me (800-780-7437) to discuss…if you so wish.
Geoff Sher
Hi Dr
We did CGH testing on day 3 and all embroys were abnormal. We retested the embroys on day 5 and one came out normal. What are the chances of this embroy being normal? I know it’s better to test day 5 embroys but why would the embroy have shown abnormalities on day 3?
I look forward to hearing from you
Pippa
Frankly, in my opinion array CGH on day 3 is NOT that reliable. In my opinion, metaphase CGH on day 3 embryos is far better. Array CGH on blastocysts is reliable. Thus it does not surprise me that the day 3 CGH result was not normal and the day 5 was. I would be quite confident with the blastocyst biopsy result.
Good luck and please keep me in the loop.
Geoff Sher