RESUMO
The use of assisted reproduction treatment, especially intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), is now linked to a range of adverse consequences, the aetiology of which remains largely undefined. Our objective of this study was to determine differences in gene expression of blastocysts generated by ICSI as well as ICSI with artificial oocyte activation (ICSI-A) versus the less manipulative IVF, providing fundamental genetic information that can be used to aid in the diagnosis or treatment of those adversely affected by assisted reproduction treatment, as well as stimulate research to further refine these techniques. Murine blastocysts were generated by ICSI, ICSI-A and IVF, and processed for a microarray-based analysis of gene expression. Ten blastocysts were pooled for each procedure and three independent replicates generated. The data were then processed to determine differential gene expression and to identify biological pathways affected by the procedures. In blastocysts derived by ICSI versus IVF, the expression of 197 genes differed (P < 0.01). In blastocysts derived by ICSI-A versus IVF and ICSI-A versus ICSI, the expression of 132 and 65 genes differed respectively (P < 0.01). Procedural-induced changes in genes regulating specific biological pathways revealed some consistency to known adverse consequences. Detailed investigation of procedure-specific dysfunction is therefore warranted.
Assuntos
Fertilização in vitro/métodos , Regulação da Expressão Gênica no Desenvolvimento , Técnicas de Reprodução Assistida , Injeções de Esperma Intracitoplásmicas/métodos , Animais , Blastocisto/citologia , Células Cultivadas , Feminino , Perfilação da Expressão Gênica , Masculino , Camundongos , Análise de Sequência com Séries de Oligonucleotídeos , Oócitos/citologia , Espermatozoides/citologia , Espermatozoides/patologia , TemperaturaRESUMO
Two companies, MRL and Meridian Diagnostics, have developed Food and Drug Administration-approved herpes simplex virus type 1 type-specific enzyme immunoassays. The sensitivity, specificity, and overall testing efficiency of these assays were 98.2, 93.8, and 96.6% for MRL and 98.8, 99.0, and 98.1% for Meridian, making both of these kits suitable for use in the clinical lab.