International Journal of Infertility & Fetal Medicine

Register      Login

VOLUME 13 , ISSUE 1 ( January-April, 2022 ) > List of Articles

Original Article

Impact of Prematuration Culture on Zygote Morphology in In Vitro Maturation: An Early Clue to Embryo Competence

Mohammed A Cheruveetil, Prasanna K Shetty, Kamini A Rao, Mir Jaffar, Arya Rajendran, Muhammed Asif, Sumi Maria

Keywords : Cilostamide, Nucleolar precursor bodies, Polar body, Prematuration culture, Pronuclear zygote, Pronuclei

Citation Information : Cheruveetil MA, Shetty PK, Rao KA, Jaffar M, Rajendran A, Asif M, Maria S. Impact of Prematuration Culture on Zygote Morphology in In Vitro Maturation: An Early Clue to Embryo Competence. Int J Infertil Fetal Med 2022; 13 (1):5-14.

DOI: 10.5005/jp-journals-10016-1251

License: CC BY-NC 4.0

Published Online: 19-01-2022

Copyright Statement:  Copyright © 2022; The Author(s).


Abstract

Background: The study was undertaken to gain insight into the morphology of pronuclear oocytes developed through prematuration culture with cilostamide. The criteria such as position and orientation of pronuclei (PN), the size and distribution of nucleolar precursor bodies (NPB), alignment of polar body (PB), and the cytoplasmic halo have been included in the study. Objective: To elucidate the effect of cilostamide on zygote morphology in prematuration culture. Study design: A prospective analysis of pronuclear zygote morphology developed through IVM with prematuration culture using cilostamide conducted from April 2018 to March 2020. Materials and methods: The present study comprised of 57 zygotes, obtained from the in vitro matured oocytes of 63 patients aged between 25 and 35 years, who underwent controlled ovarian stimulation for IVF/ICSI. Results: In pronuclear morphology, the central juxtaposed position was higher in the experimental group (77.1%) than in the control group (54.5%). The Group 1 NPB distribution was statistically significant in the experimental group (51.4%) as compared to the control group (22.7%) (p = 0.03). Besides, Group 3 NPBs were lower in the experimental group (11.4%) when compared to the control group (36.4%) (p = 0.02). The α-type polar body distribution was significantly higher in the experimental group (65.7%) (p = 0.03). Cytoplasmic halo was noted in the experimental (60%) and control (45.5%) groups (p > 0.05). Conclusion: The results indicate that prematuration culture using cilostamide for synchronizing nuclear and cytoplasmic maturation yielded a better pronuclear zygote morphology.


HTML PDF Share
  1. Moor R, Dai Y, Lee C, et al. Oocyte maturation and embryonic failure. Hum Reprod Update 1998;4(3):223–226. DOI: 10.1093/humupd/4.3.223
  2. Vanhoutte L, De Sutter P, Nogueira D, et al. Nuclear and cytoplasmic maturation of in vitro matured human oocytes after temporary nuclear arrest by phosphodiesterase 3-inhibitor. Hum Reprod 2007;22(5):1239–1246. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dem007
  3. Shu Y, Zeng H, Ren Z, et al. Effects of cilostamide and forskolin on the meiotic resumption and embryonic development of immature human oocytes. Hum Reprod Oxf Engl 2008;23(3):504–513. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dem344
  4. Ebner T, Moser M, Sommergruber M, et al. Selection based on morphological assessment of oocytes and embryos at different stages of preimplantation development: a review. Hum Reprod Update 2003;9(3):251–262. DOI: 10.1093/humupd/dmg021
  5. Scott LA, Smith S. The successful use of pronuclear embryo transfers the day following oocyte retrieval. Hum Reprod Oxf Engl 1998;13(4):1003–1013. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/13.4.1003
  6. Tesarik J, Greco E. The probability of abnormal preimplantation development can be predicted by a single static observation on pronuclear stage morphology. Hum Reprod 1999;14(5):1318–1323. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/14.5.1318
  7. Scott L. Classification of pronuclei and polarity of the zygote: correlations with outcome. Color Atlas Hum Assist Reprod Lab Clin Insights 2003.
  8. Leung AKL, Lamond AI. The dynamics of the nucleolus. Crit Rev Eukaryot Gene Expr 2003;13(1):39–54. DOI: 10.1615/critreveukaryotgeneexpr.v13.i1.40
  9. Dimitri P, Corradini N, Rossi F, et al. The paradox of functional heterochromatin. Bio Essays 2005;27(1):29–41. DOI: 10.1002/bies.20158
  10. Tesarik J, Kopecny V. Developmental control of the human male pronucleus by ooplasmic factors. Hum Reprod 1989;4(8):962–968. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a137021
  11. Tesarik J, Kopecny V. Assembly of the nucleolar precursor bodies in human male pronuclei is correlated with an early RNA synthetic activity. Exp Cell Res 1990;191(1):153–156. DOI: 10.1016/0014-4827(90)90050-k
  12. Braude P, Bolton V, Moore S. Human gene expression first occurs between the four- and eight-cell stages of preimplantation development. Nature 1988;332(6163):459–461. DOI: 10.1038/332459a0
  13. Plachot M, Mandelbaum J. Oocyte maturation, fertilization and embryonic growth in vitro. Br Med Bull 1990;46(3):675–694. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.bmb.a072424
  14. Munné S, Lee A, Rosenwaks Z, et al. Diagnosis of major chromosome aneuploidies in human preimplantation embryos. Hum Reprod Oxf Engl 1993;8(12):2185–2191. DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a138001
  15. Gianaroli L, Magli MC, Munné S, et al. Will preimplantation genetic diagnosis assist patients with a poor prognosis to achieve pregnancy? Hum Reprod 1997;12(8):1762–1767. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/12.8.1762
  16. Tesarik J, Junca A, Hazout A, et al. Embryos with high implantation potential after intracytoplasmic sperm injection can be recognized by a simple, non-invasive examination of pronuclear morphology. Hum Reprod 2000;15:1396–1399. doi: 10.1093/humrep/15.6.1396
  17. Scott L, Alvero R, Leondires M, et al. The morphology of human pronuclear embryos is positively related to blastocyst development and implantation. Hum Reprod Oxf Engl 2000;15(11):2394–2403. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/15.11.2394
  18. Montag M, van der Ven H. On behalf of the German pronuclear morphology study group. Evaluation of pronuclear morphology as the only selection criterion for further embryo culture and transfer: results of a prospective multicentre study. Hum Reprod 2001;16(11):2384–2389. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/16.11.2384
  19. Combelles CMH, Cekleniak NA, Racowsky C, et al. Assessment of nuclear and cytoplasmic maturation in in-vitro matured human oocytes. Hum Reprod 2002;17(4):1006–1016. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/17.4.1006
  20. Heikinheimo O, Gibbons WE. The molecular mechanisms of oocyte maturation and early embryonic development are unveiling new insights into reproductive medicine. Mol Hum Reprod 1998;4(8):745–756. DOI: 10.1093/molehr/4.8.745
  21. Trounson A, Anderiesz C, Jones G. Maturation of human oocytes in vitro and their developmental competence. Reproduction 2001;121(1):51–75. DOI: 10.1530/rep.0.1210051
  22. Eppig JJ. Coordination of nuclear and cytoplasmic oocyte maturation in eutherian mammals. Reprod Fertil Dev 1996;8(4):485–489. DOI: 10.1071/rd9960485
  23. Scott L. Pronuclear scoring as a predictor of embryo development. Reprod Biomed Online 2003;6(2):201–214. DOI: 10.1016/s1472-6483(10)61711-7
  24. Schatten G. The centrosome and its mode of inheritance: the reduction of the centrosome during gametogenesis and its restoration during fertilization. Dev Biol 1994;165(2):299–335. DOI: 10.1006/dbio.1994.1256
  25. Sathananthan AH, Ratnam SS, Ng SC, et al. The sperm centriole: its inheritance, replication and perpetuation in early human embryos. Hum Reprod 1996;11(2):345–356. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/11.2.345
  26. Edwards RG, Beard HK. Is the success of human IVF more a matter of genetics and evolution than growing blastocysts? Hum Reprod 1999;14(1):1–4. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/14.1.1
  27. Van Blerkom J, Davis P, Merriam J, et al. Nuclear and cytoplasmic dynamics of sperm penetration, pronuclear formation and microtubule organization during fertilization and early preimplantation development in the human. Hum Reprod Update 1995;1(5):429–461. DOI: 10.1093/humupd/1.5.429
  28. Pickering SJ, Braude PR, Johnson MH, et al. Transient cooling to room temperature can cause irreversible disruption of the meiotic spindle in the human oocyte. Fertil Steril 1990;54(1):102–108. DOI: 10.1016/s0015-0282(16)53644-9
  29. Almeida PA, Bolton VN. The effect of temperature fluctuations on the cytoskeletal organisation and chromosomal constitution of the human oocyte. Zygote Camb Engl 1995;3(4):357–365. DOI: 10.1017/s0967199400002793
  30. Tesarik J, Kopecny V. Development of human male pronucleus: ultrastructure and timing. Gamete Res 1989;24(2):135–149. DOI: 10.1002/mrd.1120240203
  31. Rienzi L, Ubaldi F, Iacobelli M, et al. Day 3 embryo transfer with combined evaluation at the pronuclear and cleavage stages compares favourably with day 5 blastocyst transfer. Hum Reprod Oxf Engl 2002;17(7):1852–1855. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/17.7.1852
  32. Gianaroli L, Magli MC, Ferraretti AP, et al. Pronuclear morphology and chromosomal abnormalities as scoring criteria for embryo selection. Fertil Steril 2003;80(2):341–349. DOI: 10.1016/s0015-0282(03)00596-x
  33. Sadowy S, Tomkin G, Munné S, et al. Impaired development of zygotes with uneven pronuclear size. Zygote Camb Engl 1998;6(2):137–141. DOI: 10.1017/s0967199498000057
  34. Zollner U, Zollner K-P, Hartl G, et al. The use of a detailed zygote score after IVF/ICSI to obtain good quality blastocysts: the German experience. Hum Reprod Oxf Engl 2002;17(5):1327–1333. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/17.5.1327
  35. Munné S, Cohen J. Chromosome abnormalities in human embryos. Hum Reprod Update 1998;4(6):842–855. DOI: 10.1093/humupd/4.6.842
  36. Probst AV, Okamoto I, Casanova M, et al. A strand-specific burst in transcription of pericentric satellites is required for chromocenter formation and early mouse development. Dev Cell 2010;19(4):625–638. DOI: 10.1016/j.devcel.2010.09.002
  37. Casanova M, Pasternak M, El Marjou F, et al. Heterochromatin reorganization during early mouse development requires a single-stranded noncoding transcript. Cell Rep 2013;4(6):1156–1167. DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2013.08.015
  38. Santenard A, Ziegler-Birling C, Koch M, et al. Heterochromatin formation in the mouse embryo requires critical residues of the histone variant H3.3. Nat Cell Biol 2010;12(9):853–862.
  39. Aguirre-Lavin T, Adenot P, Bonnet-Garnier A, et al. 3D-FISH analysis of embryonic nuclei in mouse highlights several abrupt changes of nuclear organization during preimplantation development. BMC Dev Biol 2012;12(1):30. DOI: 10.1186/1471-213X-12-30
  40. Garello C, Baker H, Rai J, et al. Pronuclear orientation, polar body placement, and embryo quality after intracytoplasmic sperm injection and in-vitro fertilization: further evidence for polarity in human oocytes? Hum Reprod Oxf Engl 1999;14(10):2588–2595. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/14.10.2588
  41. Papale L, Fiorentino A, Montag M, et al. The zygote. Hum Reprod 2012;27 (Suppl 1):i22–49. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/des205
  42. Ebner T, Moser M, Sommergruber M, et al. Presence, but not type or degree of extension, of a cytoplasmic halo has a significant influence on preimplantation development and implantation behaviour. Hum Reprod 2003;18(11):2406–2412. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deg452
  43. Van Blerkom J, Davis P, Mathwig V, et al. Domains of high-polarized and low-polarized mitochondria may occur in mouse and human oocytes and early embryos. Hum Reprod 2002;17(2):393–406. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/17.2.393
  44. Payne D, Flaherty SP, Barry MF, et al. Preliminary observations on polar body extrusion and pronuclear formation in human oocytes using time-lapse video cinematography. Hum Reprod 1997;12(3):532–541. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/12.3.532
  45. Wu GJ, Simerly C, Zoran SS, et al. Microtubule and chromatin dynamics during fertilization and early development in rhesus monkeys, and regulation by intracellular calcium ions. Biol Reprod 1996;55(2):260–270. DOI: 10.1095/biolreprod55.2.260
  46. Diaz G, Setzu MD, Zucca A, et al. Subcellular heterogeneity of mitochondrial membrane potential: relationship with organelle distribution and intercellular contacts in normal, hypoxic and apoptotic cells. J Cell Sci 1999;112 (Pt 7):1077–1084.
  47. Bavister BD, Squirrell JM. Mitochondrial distribution and function in oocytes and early embryos. Hum Reprod 2000;15(Suppl 2):189–198. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/15.suppl_2.189
  48. Sousa M, Barros A, Silva J, et al. Developmental changes in calcium content of ultrastructurally distinct subcellular compartments of preimplantation human embryos. Mol Hum Reprod 1997;3(2):83–90. DOI: 10.1093/molehr/3.2.83
  49. Motta PM, Nottola SA, Makabe S, et al. Mitochondrial morphology in human fetal and adult female germ cells. Hum Reprod 2000;15 (Suppl 2):129–147. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/15.suppl_2.129
  50. Gámiz P, Rubio C, Remohí J, et al. The effect of pronuclear morphology on early development and chromosomal abnormalities in cleavage-stage embryos. Hum Reprod 2003;18(11):2413–249. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deg458
PDF Share
PDF Share

© Jaypee Brothers Medical Publishers (P) LTD.