The DOI matches its Crossref record; 44 of the 44 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Morphological and cytogenetic assessment of cleavage and blastocyst stage embryos
Abstract
Morphological assessments are the main way in which fertility clinics select in vitro generated embryo(s) for transfer to the uterus. However, it is widely acknowledged that the microscopic appearance of an embryo is only weakly correlated with its viability. Furthermore, the extent to which morphology is affected by aneuploidy, a genetic defect common in human preimplantation embryos, remains unclear. Aneuploidy is of great relevance to embryo selection as it represents one of the most important causes of implantation failure and miscarriage. The current study aimed to examine whether morphological appearance can assist in identifying embryos at risk of aneuploidy. Additionally, the data produced sheds light on how chromosomal anomalies impact development from the cleavage to the blastocyst stage. A total of 1213 embryos were examined. Comprehensive chromosome analysis was combined with well-established criteria for the assessment of embryo morphology. At the cleavage stage, chromosome abnormalities were common even amongst embryos assigned the best morphological scores, indicating that aneuploidy has little effect on microscopic appearance at fixed time points up until Day 3 of development. However, at the blastocyst stage aneuploidies were found to be significantly less common among embryos of optimal morphological quality, while such abnormalities were overrepresented amongst embryos considered to be of poor morphology. Despite the link between aneuploidy and blastocyst a…
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“Because rates of aneuploidy are known to be significantly higher at the cleavage stage compared to the blastocyst (18)”
From Frequent loss of heterozygosity in CRISPR-Cas9–edited early human embryos (2021) · cites this paper as [18]
Citations
Cites
Braude, P., Bolton, V. N., & Moore, S. S. (1988) · Nature · doi:10.1038/332459a0 · Cited by 1,462
Human aneuploidy: mechanisms and new insights into an age-old problem
Nagaoka, S. I., Hassold, T. J., & Hunt, P. A. (2012) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/nrg3245 · Cited by 1,036
The use of morphokinetics as a predictor of embryo implantation
Meseguer, M., Herrero, J., Tejera, A., Hilligsøe, K. M., Ramsing, N. B., & Remohi, J. A. (2011) · Human Reproduction · doi:10.1093/humrep/der256 · Cited by 918
Scott, R. T., Upham, K. M., Forman, E. J., Hong, K. H., Scott, K. L., Taylor, D. M., Tao, X., & Treff, N. R. (2013) · Fertility and Sterility · doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.04.035 · Cited by 589
Cummins, J. M., Breen, T. M., Harrison, K., Shaw, J., Wilson, L., & Hennessey, J. F. (1986) · Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics · doi:10.1007/bf01133388 · Cited by 561
Yang, Z., Liu, J., Collins, P. G. S., Salem, S. A., Liu, X., S-Lyle, S., Peck, A. C., Sills, E. S., & Salem, R. D. (2012) · Molecular Cytogenetics · doi:10.1186/1755-8166-5-24 · Cited by 545
Characterization of a top quality embryo, a step towards single-embryo transfer
Royen, E. V., Mangel-Schots, K., Neubourg, D. D., Valkenburg, M. H., de Meerssche, M. V., Ryckaert, G., Eestermans, W., & Gerris, J. (1999) · Human Reproduction · doi:10.1093/humrep/14.9.2345 · Cited by 507
Wells, D. (2000) · Molecular Human Reproduction · doi:10.1093/molehr/6.11.1055 · Cited by 503
Self-citationIn vitro fertilization with single euploid blastocyst transfer: a randomized controlled trial
Forman, E. J., Hong, K. H., Ferry, K. M., Tao, X., Taylor, D. M., Levy, B., Treff, N. R., & Scott, R. T. (2013) · Fertility and Sterility · doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.02.056 · Cited by 496
Embryo scoring as a prognostic tool in IVF treatment
Puissant, F., Rysselberge, M. V., Barlow, P., Deweze, J., & Leroy, F. (1987) · Human Reproduction · doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a136618 · Cited by 443
Research works printed but not linked: 8
- 1998, Nature; Physical Science (London), 332, 459
- 2013, RBM ONLINE, 26, 477
- 2012, RBM ONLINE, 25, 371
- 1998, JARG, 15, 297
- 2006, RBM ONLINE, 12, 234
- Puissant, 1987, Human Reproduction, 2, 705, 10.1093/humrep/ · DOI
- 2010, RBM ONLINE, 21, 118
- 2013, RBM ONLINE, 26, 120
Cited by
Sorted by citations
The origin, mechanisms, incidence and clinical consequences of chromosomal mosaicism in humans
Taylor, T. H., Gitlin, S., Patrick, J. L., Crain, J. L., Wilson, J. M., & Griffin, D. K. (2014) · Human Reproduction Update · doi:10.1093/humupd/dmu016 · Cited by 396
Minasi, M. G., Colasante, A., Riccio, T., Ruberti, A., Casciani, V., Scarselli, F., Spinella, F., Fiorentino, F., Varricchio, M. T., & Greco, E. (2016) · Human Reproduction · doi:10.1093/humrep/dew183 · Cited by 334
Mosaicism in health and disease — clones picking up speed
Forsberg, L. A., Gisselsson, D., & Dumanski, J. P. (2016) · Nature Reviews Genetics · doi:10.1038/nrg.2016.145 · Cited by 261
Frequent loss of heterozygosity in CRISPR-Cas9–edited early human embryos
Alanis-Lobato, G., Zohren, J., McCarthy, A., Fogarty, N. M. E., Kubikova, N., Hardman, E., Greco, M., Wells, D., Turner, J. M. A., & Niakan, K. K. (2021) · Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences · doi:10.1073/pnas.2004832117 · Cited by 234
Self-citationGardner, D. K., & Balaban, B. (2016) · Molecular Human Reproduction · doi:10.1093/molehr/gaw057 · Cited by 234
Metadata
- Authors
- Fragouli, E., Alfarawati, S., Spath, K., & Wells, D.
- Affiliations
- University of Oxford (GB)
- Corresponding author
- Fragouli, E.
- Venue
- Molecular Human Reproduction
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2013-11-01
- Volume
- 20
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 117-126
- ISSN
- 1360-9947 (ISSN-L)
- 1460-2407
- OpenAlex
- W2142766753
- Cited by
- 189
- References
- 44
- Citations by year
- 2025: 11 · 2024: 22 · 2023: 22 · 2022: 18 · 2021: 24 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 15 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 11 · 2014: 8
- FWCI
- 9.93
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- Molecular Human Reproduction (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Funders
- National Institute for Health and Care Research
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Prenatal Screening and Diagnostics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Reproductive Biology and Fertility
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Assisted Reproductive Technology and Twin Pregnancy
- Keywords
- embryo morphology, aneuploidy, preimplantation embryo, cleavage stage, blastocyst, embryo selection, chromosomal abnormalities, Down syndrome, sex ratio, embryo growth rate, implantation failure
- MeSH terms
- Aneuploidy, Blastocyst, Chromosomes, Human, Embryo Transfer, Female, Fertilization in Vitro, Humans, Male, Microscopy, Embryo Implantation, Pregnancy, Research Design, In Situ Hybridization, Fluorescence, Preimplantation Diagnosis, Cytogenetic Analysis, Comparative Genomic Hybridization
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
