Ultrasound Imaging in Reproductive MedicineAdvances in Infertility Work-up, Treatment, and ART /

XVII, 360 p. 180 illus., 108 illus. in color.onli

Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) for genetic prion disorder due to F198S mutation in the PRNP gene.

ImportanceTo describe the first case of preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) and in vitro fertilization (IVF) performed for the prevention of genetic prion disease in the children of a 27-year-old asymptomatic woman with a family history of Gerstmann-Sträussler-Sheinker syndrome (GSS).ObservationsPGD and fertilization cycles resulted in detection of 6 F198S mutation-free embryos. Of these, 2 were selected for embryo transfer to the patient's uterus, yielding a clinical twin pregnancy and birth of healthy but slightly premature offspring with normal development at age 27 months.Conclusion and relevanceIVF with PGD is a viable option for couples who wish to avoid passing the disease to their offspring. Neurologists should be aware of PGD to be able to better consult at-risk families on their reproductive choices

Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) for genetic prion disorder due to F198S mutation in the PRNP gene.

ImportanceTo describe the first case of preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) and in vitro fertilization (IVF) performed for the prevention of genetic prion disease in the children of a 27-year-old asymptomatic woman with a family history of Gerstmann-Sträussler-Sheinker syndrome (GSS).ObservationsPGD and fertilization cycles resulted in detection of 6 F198S mutation-free embryos. Of these, 2 were selected for embryo transfer to the patient's uterus, yielding a clinical twin pregnancy and birth of healthy but slightly premature offspring with normal development at age 27 months.Conclusion and relevanceIVF with PGD is a viable option for couples who wish to avoid passing the disease to their offspring. Neurologists should be aware of PGD to be able to better consult at-risk families on their reproductive choices

Lack of species-specificity in mammalian sperm chemotaxis

Attraction of spermatozoa by way of chemotaxis to substances secreted from the egg or its surrounding cells has been demonstrated in marine species, amphibians, and mammals. This process is species- or family-specific in marine invertebrates: a chemoattractant for one marine species is usually not recognized by another species or by a member of another family. It is not known whether this selectivity is also the rule in other phyla. Furthermore, it is not at all obvious that such selectivity would be advantageous to species with internal fertilization. Here, using a directionality-based assay for chemotaxis, we studied in vitro the chemotactic response of human and rabbit spermatozoa to human, rabbit, and bovine egg-related factors. We found that spermatozoa from each of the two sources responded similarly well to egg-related factors obtained from any of the three species examined. These results indicate lack of chemotaxis-related, species specificity between these species, suggesting that their sperm chemoattractants are common or very similar. The findings further suggest that mammals do not rely on species specificity of sperm chemotaxis for avoidance of interspecies fertilization. © 2003 Elsevier Science (USA). All rights reserved.Fil: Sun, Fei. The Weizmann Institute of Science; IsraelFil: Giojalas, Laura Cecilia. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba. Instituto de Investigaciones Biológicas y Tecnológicas. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas, Físicas y Naturales. Instituto de Investigaciones Biológicas y Tecnológicas; ArgentinaFil: Rovasio, Roberto Americo. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba. Instituto de Investigaciones Biológicas y Tecnológicas. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas, Físicas y Naturales. Instituto de Investigaciones Biológicas y Tecnológicas; ArgentinaFil: Tur Kaspa, Ilan. Barzilai Medical Center; IsraelFil: Sanchez, Raul. Universidad de La Frontera; ChileFil: Eisenbach, Michael. The Weizmann Institute of Science; Israe

The Decision-Making Process of Genetically At-Risk Couples Considering Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis: Initial Findings from a Grounded Theory Study

Exponential growth in genomics has led to public and private initiatives worldwide that have dramatically increased the number of procreative couples who are aware of their ability to transmit genetic disorders to their future children. Understanding how couples process the meaning of being genetically at risk for their procreative life lags far behind the advances in genomic and reproductive sciences. Moreover, society, policy makers, and clinicians are not aware of the experiences and nuances involved when modern couples are faced with using Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis (PGD). The purpose of this study was to discover the decision-making process of genetically at-risk couples as they decide whether to use PGD to prevent the transmission of known single-gene or sex-linked genetic disorders to their children. A qualitative, grounded theory design guided the study in which 22 couples (44 individual partners) from the USA, who were actively considering PGD, participated. Couples were recruited from June 2009 to May 2010 from the Internet and from a large PGD center and a patient newsletter. In-depth semi-structured interviews were completed with each individual partner within the couple dyad, separate from their respective partner. We discovered that couples move through four phases (Identify, Contemplate, Resolve, Engage) of a complex, dynamic, and iterative decision-making process where multiple, sequential decisions are made. In the Identify phase, couples acknowledge the meaning of their at-risk status. Parenthood and reproductive options are explored in the Contemplate phase, where 41% of couples remained for up to 36 months before moving into the Resolve phase. In Resolve, one of three decisions about PGD use is reached, including: Accepting, Declining, or Oscillating. Actualizing decisions occur in the Engage phase. Awareness of the decision-making process among genetically at-risk couples provides foundational work for understanding critical processes and aids in identifying important gaps for intervention and future research

Human sperm chemotaxis: Both the oocyte and its surrounding cumulus cells secrete sperm chemoattractants

Background: Human sperm chemotaxis to pre-ovulatory follicular fluid is well established in vitro. However, it is not known whether the female's oocyte-cumulus complex secretes sperm chemoattractants subsequent to ovulation (for enabling sperm chemotaxis within the Fallopian tube) and, if so, which of these cell types - the oocyte or the cumulus oophorus - is the physiological origin of the secreted chemoattractant. Methods: By employing a directionality-based chemotaxis assay, we examined whether media conditioned with either individual, mature (metaphase II) human oocytes or the surrounding cumulus cells attract human sperm by chemotaxis. Results: We observed sperm chemotaxis to each of these media, suggesting that both the oocyte and the cumulus cells secrete sperm chemoattractants. Conclusions: These observations suggest that sperm chemoattractants are secreted not only prior to ovulation within the follicle, as earlier studies have demonstrated, but also after oocyte maturation outside the follicle, and that there are two chemoattractant origins: the mature oocyte and the surrounding cumulus cells.Fil: Sun, Fei. Weizmann Institute of Science. Department of Biological Chemistry; IsraelFil: Bahat, Anat. Weizmann Institute of Science. Department of Biological Chemistry; IsraelFil: Gakamsky, Anna. Weizmann Institute of Science. Department of Biological Chemistry; IsraelFil: Girsh, Eliezer. Ben Gurion University of the Negev; IsraelFil: Katz, Nathan. Ben Gurion University of the Negev; IsraelFil: Giojalas, Laura Cecilia. Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas. Centro Científico Tecnológico Conicet - Córdoba. Instituto de Investigaciones Biológicas y Tecnológicas. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas, Físicas y Naturales. Instituto de Investigaciones Biológicas y Tecnológicas; Argentina. Universidad Nacional de Córdoba. Facultad de Ciencias Exactas, Físicas y Naturales. Centro de Biología Celular y Molecular; ArgentinaFil: Tur-Kaspa, Ilan. Ben Gurion University of the Negev; IsraelFil: Eisenbach, Michael. Weizmann Institute of Science. Department of Biological Chemistry; Israe