The effects of differences in trophectoderm biopsy techniques and the number of cells collected for biopsy on next-generation sequencing results

Yamato Mizobe; Yukari Kuwatsuru; Yuko Kuroki; Yumiko Fukumoto; Mari Tokudome; Harue Moewaki; Mia Watanabe; Tokiko Iwakawa; Kazuhiro Takeuchi

doi:10.1002/rmb2.12463

The effects of differences in trophectoderm biopsy techniques and the number of cells collected for biopsy on next-generation sequencing results

Reprod Med Biol. 2022 Apr 20;21(1):e12463. doi: 10.1002/rmb2.12463. eCollection 2022 Jan-Dec.

Authors

Yamato Mizobe¹, Yukari Kuwatsuru¹, Yuko Kuroki¹, Yumiko Fukumoto¹, Mari Tokudome¹, Harue Moewaki¹, Mia Watanabe¹, Tokiko Iwakawa¹, Kazuhiro Takeuchi¹

Affiliation

¹ Takeuchi Ladies Clinic/Center for Reproductive Medicine Aira Japan.

Abstract

Purpose: To examine how differences in trophectoderm biopsy techniques affect the frequency of mosaic embryos and sequencing results.

Methods: We examined differences in next-generation sequencing (NGS) analysis results among operators or according to biopsy technique. Additionally, we determined the cut-off for the number of collected cells to predict the occurrence of mosaicism. We collected cells according to the cut-off value and examined whether there was a difference in the NGS analysis results between the pulling and flicking methods.

Results: There was no difference in the NGS analysis results among the operators. Regarding re-biopsy, changes in the mosaic were observed in all specimens. The cut-off value for the number of collected cells was five, and when more than five cells were collected, there was no difference in the NGS analysis results between the two methods.

Conclusions: We demonstrated that if trophectoderm biopsy techniques and NGS are stable, the cell collection location has a greater effect on NGS results than the biopsy technique.

Keywords: euploidy; mosaic; next‐generation sequencing; preimplantation genetic testing; trophectoderm biopsy.