The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Chromosomal mosaicism in human preimplantation embryos: a systematic review
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Although chromosomal mosaicism in human preimplantation embryos has been described for almost two decades, its exact prevalence is still unknown. The prevalence of mosaicism is important in the context of preimplantation genetic screening in which the chromosomal status of an embryo is determined by the analysis of a single cell from that embryo. METHODS: Here we report a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies on the chromosomal constitution of human preimplantation embryos. In 36 studies, out of 2117 citations that met our search criteria, data were provided extensively enough to allow classification of each analysed embryo with prespecified criteria for its chromosomal makeup. The main outcome of this classification was the prevalence of chromosomal mosaicism in human preimplantation embryos. RESULTS: A total of 815 embryos could be classified. Of these, 177 (22%) were diploid, 599 (73%) were mosaic, of which 480 (59% of the total number of embryos) were diploid-aneuploid mosaic and 119 (14% of the total number of embryos) were aneuploid mosaic, and 39 (5%) contained other numerical chromosomal abnormalities. The distribution of the embryos over these categories was associated with the developmental stage of the embryos, the method used for analysis and the number of chromosomes analysed. CONCLUSIONS: Diploid-aneuploid mosaicism is by far the most common chromosomal constitution in spare human preimplantation embryos after IVF. This undermines the reliable determination of the ploidy status of a cleavage-stage embryo based on the analysis of a single cell. Future research should determine the origin and developmental potential of mosaic embryos.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cited by
Capalbo, A., Poli, M., Rienzi, L., Girardi, L., Patassini, C., Fabiani, M., Cimadomo, D., Benini, F., Farcomeni, A., Cuzzi, J., et al. (2021) · The American Journal of Human Genetics · doi:10.1016/j.ajhg.2021.11.002 · Cited by 269
Mosaicism in Preimplantation Human Embryos: When Chromosomal Abnormalities Are the Norm
McCoy, R. C. (2017) · Trends in Genetics · doi:10.1016/j.tig.2017.04.001 · Cited by 235
Araki, M., & Ishii, T. (2014) · Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology · doi:10.1186/1477-7827-12-108 · Cited by 150
Inheritance of paternal DNA damage by histone-mediated repair restriction
Wang, S., Meyer, D. H., & Schumacher, B. (2023) · Nature · doi:10.1038/s41586-022-05544-w · Cited by 68
RNA-seq as a tool for evaluating human embryo competence
Groff, A. F., Resetkova, N., DiDomenico, F., Sakkas, D., Penzias, A., Rinn, J. L., & Eggan, K. (2019) · Genome Research · doi:10.1101/gr.252981.119 · Cited by 47
Metadata
- Authors
- van Echten-Arends, J., Mastenbroek, S., Sikkema-Raddatz, B., Korevaar, J. C., Heineman, M. J., van der Veen, F., & Repping, S.
- Venue
- Human Reproduction Update
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2011-04-29
- Volume
- 17
- Issue
- 5
- Pages
- 620-627
- ISSN
- 1355-4786 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-2369
- OpenAlex
- W2169423456
- Cited by
- 311
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 2.78
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Chromosomal mosaicism in human preimplantation embryos: a systematic review. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1093/humupd/dmr014
- The paper
- van Echten-Arends, J., Mastenbroek, S., Sikkema-Raddatz, B., Korevaar, J. C., Heineman, M. J., van der Veen, F., & Repping, S. (2011). Chromosomal mosaicism in human preimplantation embryos: a systematic review. Human Reproduction Update. https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmr014
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.