Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39390272›Full record

ArticleReproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.)2024

Comparison of Preimplantation Mouse Embryos with Different Genetic Backgrounds as Models for Evaluating Human Embryo Culture Media Composition.

E Korchivaia, A Ivanova, I Volodyaev, M Semenova

Abstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Reproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.), 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

E Korchivaia *Department of Embryology, Biological Faculty, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Leninskie Gory, 1, Bld 12, Moscow, 119991, Russia. elenakorchivaya@gmail.com.ORCID 0000-0003-0412-0037
A Ivanova *Department of Embryology, Biological Faculty, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Leninskie Gory, 1, Bld 12, Moscow, 119991, Russia.ORCID 0000-0003-0988-3009
I VolodyaevDepartment of Embryology, Biological Faculty, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Leninskie Gory, 1, Bld 12, Moscow, 119991, Russia.ORCID 0000-0003-3483-1489
M SemenovaDepartment of Embryology, Biological Faculty, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Leninskie Gory, 1, Bld 12, Moscow, 119991, Russia.ORCID 0000-0003-4108-029X

Funding

Interdisciplinary Clinical Association for Reproductive Medicine (ICARM) No numberMC Femina LLC (F-group) No number
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Can the best culture medium be determined by mouse embryo testing? Zygotes/embryos of four different mouse strains: inbred Balb/c (n = 79) and C57Bl/6 (n = 95), F1 hybrid DBA/2*C57Bl/6 (n = 133), and outbred ICR (n = 69) were incubated in vitro in four culture media: 1-Step Culture Medium (VitaVitro), CSC medium (Irvine Scientific), Sage 1-Step medium (Origio), G-TL medium (Vitrolife). The embryos were cultured under standard conditions at atmospheric oxygen: 37℃; 6% CO2, 100% humidity. Standard MEA-test parameters (number of expanded blastocysts on E4.5), as well as additional characteristics (embryo development on E2.5-E4.5, number of hatching and hatched blastocysts on E4.5, embryo arrest and degeneration) were assessed for each of the strain-medium combinations. The results were compared across strains as well as across media. Embryo development depended on both the media and the mouse strain. Embryos from inbred and outbred mice were more sensitive to suboptimal culture conditions compared to the hybrid strain; this was reflected in reduced blastocyst and hatching rates, as well as an increased percentage of arrested and degraded embryos. The choice of optimal media depended strongly on the strain: CSC was better for Balb/c, Sage 1-step for C57Bl/6, while both were preferred for hybrids, and G-TL for outbreds. VitaVitro was quite good for hybrids and performed worse for other strains. Overall, the embryos of each strain behaved differently in different media, and it was not possible to make a real preference for any of them over human embryos based on the results of any single mouse strain. Only a pooled sample of different mouse strains can be used for comprehensive media MEA testing. MEA testing with any strain of mice is doomed to error due to their specific culture requirements. Hybrid mice are too reproductively efficient and cannot be used to distinguish media based on their subtle differences. Outbred and inbred mice are too sensitive and may be delayed or degraded in culture media that is well suited to the requirements of human embryos. Combined analysis of multiple mouse strains should be used to test media more fully and may serve as a model for the heterogeneity of human embryos in IVF clinics.

Indexed as

Culture MediaEmbryo Culture TechniquesEmbryonic DevelopmentFertilization in VitroModels, AnimalAnimalsBlastocystFemaleGenetic BackgroundHumansMaleMiceMice, Inbred BALB CMice, Inbred C57BLMice, Inbred ICRPregnancyCulture MediaCulture mediaEmbryo cultureMouse embryo assayQuality control

Identifiers

PMID39390272

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.