Please wait a minute...
Frontiers of Medicine

ISSN 2095-0217

ISSN 2095-0225(Online)

CN 11-5983/R

Postal Subscription Code 80-967

2018 Impact Factor: 1.847

Front Med Chin    2009, Vol. 3 Issue (2) : 220-226     DOI: 10.1007/s11684-009-0037-2
RESEARCH ARTICLE |
Effect of repeated gonadotropin stimulation on ovarian reserves and proliferation of ovarian surface epithelium in mice
Linlin LIANG, Bei XU, Guijin ZHU()
Reproductive Medicine Center, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medicine College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430030, China
Download: PDF(279 KB)   HTML
Export: BibTeX | EndNote | Reference Manager | ProCite | RefWorks
Abstract  

This study aimed to evaluate the effect of repeated ovarian stimulation (OS) on the ovarian follicular population and morphology in female mice and its influence on the embryo’s developmental ability, and the profile of the ovarian surface epithelium (OSE). A total of 75 mice were enrolled in this experiment and randomly assigned into three groups: repeated ovarian stimulated group [n=25; receiving 5 IU pregnant mare serum gonadotrophin (PMSG) and human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) at 6 day intervals for 5 cycles]; single ovarian stimulated group (n=25; receiving 5 IU PMSG and hCG for 1 cycle), and control group (n=25; without additional treatment). The follicle number at various stages and the morphologies were recorded respectively in the three groups. The harvested oocytes or embryos, cleavage rate, good quality embryo rate, and blastocyst production rate were counted and calculated, and the proliferations of ovarian surface epithelium were evaluated respectively. In the three groups, the single ovarian stimulation treatment significantly increased the mean number of ovarian oocytes or embryos (39.25±10.77 one-cell embryos/female); on the other hand, repeated gonadotropin stimulation obtained the lowest mean number (5.15± 2.81 eggs/female, P<0.01). Repeated ovarian stimulation also tended to decrease normal follicles of primary follicles (66.67%) and secondary follicles (72.86%), and got the lowest cleavage rate (67.47%), lowest good quality embryo rate (2.41%), and lowest blastocyst production rate (0). The OSE cells adjacent to the antral follicles and corpus luteum (CL) in the repeated ovarian stimulated group (81.8%) had a significantly higher proliferation rate than the other groups. The proliferation rate of the OSE in the single ovarian stimulated group (56.4%) was significantly higher than that in the control group (37.5%) (P<0.01). In conclusion, single ovarian stimulation may produce more oocytes/embryos. However, repeated gonadotropin stimulation may have a negative effect on the ovarian follicular quality, the number of mature retrieved oocytes, and the embryo quality, even increasing the chance of ovarian cancer.

Keywords gonadotropin-releasing hormone      ovarian reserve      embryo developmental ability      ovarian surface epithelium     
Corresponding Authors: ZHU Guijin,Email:zhu_guijin@sina.com   
Issue Date: 05 June 2009
URL:  
http://academic.hep.com.cn/fmd/EN/10.1007/s11684-009-0037-2     OR     http://academic.hep.com.cn/fmd/EN/Y2009/V3/I2/220
Fig.1  Histological pictures of mouse ovarian tissues of three groups (HE, ×400). (a) Ovarian tissue in the control group, the morphologically normal primary (P) and secondary follicles (S) consisted of intact oocytes and compact granulosa cells. (b) Ovarian tissue subjected to single ovarian stimulated group, the normal secondary follicle (S.N) and the abnormal secondary follicle (S. Ab) are seen. The abnormal secondary follicle (arrow) have a shrunken oocyte. (c) Ovarian tissue subjected to repeated ovarian stimulated group, primary follicles (P) and secondary follicles (S) are morphologically abnormal. The follicles haved shrunken oocytes with pyknotic nuclei.
Fig.2  The percent age of primordial(1), primary(20 and secondary(3) follicles in mouse ovarian tissue in control group, single ovarian stimulated group and repeated ovarian stimulated group
Fig.3  Percentages of morphologically normal follicles in the stages of primary(1) and secondary(2) in control group, single ovarian stimulated group and repeated ovarian stimulated group. : <0.05, compared with control group and single ovarian stimulated group.
Fig.4  Cleavage rate(1), good quality embryo rate(20 and blastocyst rate(3) of control group, single ovarian stimulated group and repeated ovarian stimulated group. Percentage data were shown as ±.: <0.05, compared with control group and single ovarian stimulated group.
Fig.5  The OSE cell counts adjacent to antral follicles and corpus luteum (CL) in three groups. (a) Control group; (b) single ovarian stimulated group; (c) repeated ovarian stimulated group. Data represent the least-square mean (%) of proliferation. A significant difference was shown among groups (<0.05). BrdU in the OSE of cells surrounding antral follicles and CL stained with DAB and counterstained with hematoxylin from postovulatory treatment groups. BrdU-positive cells were indicated by black arrows, BrdU-negative cells were labeled with arrowheads, and proliferating granulosa cells within antral follicles were labeled with red arrows.
1 Fowler R E, Edwards R G. Induction of superovulation and pregnancy in mature mice by gonadotrophins. J Endocrinol , 1957, 15(4): 374-384
doi: 10.1677/joe.0.0150374
2 Ertzeid G, Storeng R. The impact of ovarian stimulation on implantation and fetal development in mice. Hum Reprod , 2001, 16(2): 221-225
doi: 10.1093/humrep/16.2.221
3 Hashimoto S, Kuramochi T, Aoyagi K, Takahashi R, Ueda M, Hirao M, Kamei M, Kitada K, Hirasawa K. Refined porcine follicle stimulating hormone promotes the responsiveness of rabbits to multiple-ovulation treatment. Exp Anim , 2004, 53(4): 395-397
doi: 10.1538/expanim.53.395
4 Kelley R L, Kind K L, Lane M, Robker R L, Thompson J G, Edwards L J. Recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone alters maternal ovarian hormone concentrations and the uterus and perturbs fetal development in mice. Am J Physiol Endocrinol Metab , 2006, 291(4): E761-770
doi: 10.1152/ajpendo.00079.2006
5 De Feu M A, Patton J, Evans A C, Lonergan P, Butler S T. The effect of strain of Holstein-Friesian cow on size of ovarian structures, periovulatory circulating steroid concentrations, and embryo quality following superovulation. Theriogenology , 2008, 70(7): 1101-1110
doi: 10.1016/j.theriogenology.2008.06.030
6 Swanson W F, Roth T L, Graham K, Horohov D W, Godke R A. Kinetics of the humoral immune response to multiple treatments with exogenous gonadotropins and relation to ovarian responsiveness in domestic cats. Am J Vet Res , 1996, 57(3): 302-307
7 Combelles C M, Albertini D F. Assessment of oocyte quality following repeated gonadotropin stimulation in the mouse. Biol Reprod , 2003, 68(3): 812-821
doi: 10.1095/biolreprod.102.008656
8 Ertzeid G, Storeng R. Adverse effects of gonadotrophin treatment on pre- and postimplantation development in mice. J Reprod Fertil , 1992, 96: 649-655
doi: 10.1530/jrf.0.0960649
9 van der Auwera I, D'Hooghe T. Superovulation of female mice delays embryonic and fetal development. Hum Reprod , 2001, 16(6): 1237-1243
doi: 10.1093/humrep/16.6.1237
10 Godwin A K, Testa J R, Handel L M, Liu Z, Vanderveer L A, Tracey P A, Hamilton T C. Spontaneous transformation of rat ovarian surface epithelial cells: association with cytogenetic changes and implications of repeated ovulation in the etiology of ovarian cancer. J Natl Cancer Inst , 1992, 84(8): 592-601
doi: 10.1093/jnci/84.8.592
11 Bose C K. Follicle stimulating hormone receptor in ovarian surface epithelium and epithelial ovarian cancer. Oncol Res , 2008, 17(5): 231-238
doi: 10.3727/096504008786111383
12 Katabuchi H, Okamura H. Cell biology of human ovarian surface epithelial cells and ovarian carcinogenesis. Med Electron Microsc , 2003, 36(2): 74-86
13 Murphy B D, Martinuk S D. Equine chorionic gonadotropin. Endocr Rev , 1991, 12(1): 27-44
doi: 10.1210/edrv-12-1-27
14 Gougeon A. Dynamics of follicular growth in the human: a model from preliminary results. Hum Reprod , 1986, 1(2): 81-87
15 Cleary M, Snow M, Paris M, Shaw J, Cox S L, Jenkin G. Cryopreservation of mouse ovarian tissue following prolonged exposure to an ischemic environment. Cryobiology , 2001, 42(2): 121-133
doi: 10.1006/cryo.2001.2315
16 Lucci C M, Kacinskis M A, Rumpf R, Báo S N. Effects of lowered temperatures and media on short-term preservation of zebu (Bos indicus) preantral ovarian follicles. Theriogenology , 2004, 61(2,3): 461-472
17 Combelles C M, Albertini D F. Microtubule patterning during meiotic maturation in mouse oocytes is determined by cell cycle-specific sorting and redistribution of gamma-tubulin. Dev Biol , 2001, 239(2): 281-294
doi: 10.1006/dbio.2001.0444
18 Burdette J E, Kurley S J, Kilen S M, Mayo K E, Woodruff T K. Gonadotropin-induced superovulation drives ovarian surface epithelia proliferation in CD1 mice. Endocrinology , 2006, 147(5): 2338-2345
doi: 10.1210/en.2005-1629
19 Yang S, He X, Hildebrandt T B, Jewgenow K, Goeritz F, Tang X, Zhou Q, Ji W. Effects of rhFSH dose on ovarian follicular response, oocyte recovery and embryo development in rhesus monkeys. Theriogenology , 2007, 67(6): 1194-1201
doi: 10.1016/j.theriogenology.2006.10.021
20 Lee S T, Kim T M, Cho M Y, Moon S Y, Han J Y, Lim J M. Development of a hamster superovulation program and adverse effects of gonadotropins on microfilament formation during oocyte development. Fertil Steril , 2005, Suppl 1: 1264-1274
doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2004.09.039
21 Lee S T, Han H J, Oh S J, Lee E J, Han J Y, Lim J M. Influence of ovarian hyperstimulation and ovulation induction on the cytoskeletal dynamics and developmental competence of oocytes. Mol Reprod Dev , 2006, 73(8): 1022-1033
doi: 10.1002/mrd.20500
22 Pal L, Jindal S, Witt B R, Santoro N. Less is more: increased gonadotropin use for ovarian stimulation adversely influences clinical pregnancy and live birth after in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril , 2008, 89(6): 1694-1701
doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.05.055
23 Schipper I, Hop W C, Fauser B C. The follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) threshold/window concept examined by different interventions with exogenous FSH during the follicular phase of the normal menstrual cycle: duration, rather than magnitude, of FSH increase affects follicle development. J Clin Endocrinol Metab , 1998, 83(4): 1292-1298
doi: 10.1210/jc.83.4.1292
24 Chao H T, Lee S Y, Lee H M, Liao T L, Wei Y H, Kao S H. Repeated ovarian stimulations induce oxidative damage and mitochondrial DNA mutations in mouse ovaries. Ann N Y Acad Sci , 2005, 1042: 148-156
doi: 10.1196/annals.1338.016
25 Iwata N, Inazu N, Endo T, Satoh T. Gonadotropin-induced ovarian carbonyl reductase in mice and hamsters: comparison with carbonyl reductase in rats. Life Sci , 1993, 53(23): 1729-1733
doi: 10.1016/0024-3205(93)90159-Z
26 Blondin P, Coenen K, Guilbault L A, Sirard M A. Superovulation can reduce the developmental competence of bovine embryos. Theriogenology , 1996 , 46(7): 1191-1203
doi: 10.1016/S0093-691X(96)00290-7
27 Wong A S, Auersperg N. Normal ovarian surface epithelium. Cancer Treat Res , 2002, 107: 161-183
28 Auersperg N, Edelson M I, Mok S C, Johnson S W, Hamilton T C. The biology of ovarian cancer. Semin Oncol , 1998, 25(3): 281-304
29 Murdoch W J, Townsend R S, McDonnel A C. Ovulation-induced DNA damage in ovarian surface epithelial cells of ewes: prospective regulatory mechanisms of repair/survival and apoptosis. Biol Reprod , 2001, 65(5): 1417-1424
doi: 10.1095/biolreprod65.5.1417
30 Murdoch W J. Metaplastic potential of p53 down-regulation in ovarian surface epithelial cells affected by ovulation. Cancer Lett , 2003, 191(1): 75-81
doi: 10.1016/S0304-3835(02)00623-7
31 Testa J R, Getts L A, Salazar H, Liu Z, Handel L M, Godwin A K, Hamilton T C. Spontaneous transformation of rat ovarian surface epithelial cells results in well to poorly differentiated tumors with a parallel range of cytogenetic complexity. Cancer Res , 1994, 54(10): 2778-2784
32 Tan O L, Fleming J S. Proliferating cell nuclear antigen immunoreactivity in the ovarian surface epithelium of mice of varying ages and total lifetime ovulation number following ovulation. Biol Reprod , 2004, 71(5): 1501-1507
doi: 10.1095/biolreprod.104.030460
No related articles found!
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited

  Shared   
  Discussed