期刊文献+

胚胎单细胞固定技术的选择与改良 被引量:1

Choice and improvement of the fixation method for preimplantation genetic diagnosis by fluorescent in situ hybridization
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的:在现有数种胚胎单细胞固定方法基础上,寻求一种稳定、理想的固定技术,并进行改良。方法:以4-细胞鼠胚(A组)和人体外受精(IVF)废弃胚胎(B组)之卵裂球为材料,分别以甲醇-冰醋酸(MA)法、吐温-盐酸(TH)改良法和MA+TH结合法进行固定,比较其各自的固定率、核形态等情况。结果:3种方法的固定率以MA法最低,且3种方法固定率差异有显著性(A组3种方法P=0.00621,B组3种方法P=0.00362);A组和B组固定后得到的核形态均与固定方法有明显相关性(P值分别为0.000和7.66×10-7);信号获得率和核信号评分与固定方法无明显关联(P值分别为0.186和0.0728)。结论:TH改良法固定后核形态不良,胞质残留率高;MA法核像直径大、质量较好,但技术要求高,难于普及;MA+TH结合法则核像较大,质量最好,技术易于掌握和推广。 Objective To find an ideal fixation method for preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Methods The mouse blastomeres(group A)and the human blastomeres(group B) were fixed by a methanol/acetic acid(MA) method, an improved Tween-20/HCl (TH) method and a MA+TH combined method respectively. The fixation rate, nuclear form and signals after hybridization were observed. Results In both groups,the MA method gained the lowest fixation rate with statistical significance (P=0.00621 in group A, P=0.00362 in group B). And the nuclear form was correlated with the fixation method (P=0.000 in group A, P=7.66×10-7 in group B), while the signal gained rate and the nuclear signal score had no obvious correlation with the fixation method (P=0.186 in group A, P=0.0728 in group B). Conclusions The improved TH method obtains the poorer nuclear form than the other two methods, and the MA method requires the higher technique. The MA+TH method not only can gain the high quality nuclear form, but also is easy to learn.
出处 《诊断学理论与实践》 2005年第1期33-37,共5页 Journal of Diagnostics Concepts & Practice
关键词 固定技术 胚胎 改良法 MA 单细胞 IVF 固定方法 结论 普及 法则 Fluorescent in situ hybridization Preimplantation genetic diagnosis Single cell fixation
  • 相关文献

参考文献13

  • 1[1]Tarkowski AK. An air-drying method for chromosome preparation from mouse eggs[J]. Cytogenetics, 1966, 5(6):394-400.
  • 2[2]Coonen E, Dumoulin JC, Ramaekers FC, et al. Optimal preparation of preimplantation embryo interphase nuclei for analysis by fluorescence in-situ hybridization[J]. Hum Reprod, 1994, 9(3):533-537.
  • 3[3]Xu K,Huang T, Liu T, et al. Improving the fixation method for preimplantation genetic diagnosis by fluorescent in situ hybridization[J]. J Assist Reprod Genet, 1998, 15(9):570-574.
  • 4[4]Dozortsev DI, McGinnis KT. An improved fixation technique for fluorescence in situ hybridization for preimplantation genetic diagnosis[J]. Fertil Steril, 2001,76(1):186-188.
  • 5[5]Velilla E, Escudero T, Munne S. Blastomere fixation techniques and risk of misdiagnosis for preimplantation genetic diagnosis of aneuploidy [J]. Reprod Biomed Online, 2002, 4(3):210-217.
  • 6[6]Hliscs R, Muhlig P, Claussen U. The spreading of metaphases is a slow process which leads to a stretching of chromosomes[J]. Cytogenet Cell Genet, 1997, 76(3-4):167-171.
  • 7[7]Munne S, Dailey T, Finkelstein M, et al. Reduction in signal overlap results in increased fish efficiency: implications for preimplantation genetic diagnosis[J]. J Assist Reprod Genet, 1996, 13(2): 149-156.
  • 8[8]Munne S, Weier HU. Simultaneous enumeration of chromosomes 13,18,21,X and Y in interphase cells for preimplantation genetic diagnosis of aneuploidy[J]. Cytogenet Cell Genet, 1996, 75(4):263-270.
  • 9[9]Munne S, Magli C, Bahce M, et al. Preimplantation diagnosis of the aneuploidies most commonly found in spontaneous abortions and live birth: XY, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18,21, 22[J]. Prenat Diagn, 1998, 18(13):1459-1466.
  • 10[10]Munne S, Magli C, Cohen J, et al. Positive outcome after preimplantation diagnosis of aneuploidy in human embryos[J]. Hum Reprod, 1999, 149: 2191-2199.

同被引文献3

引证文献1

二级引证文献1

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部