Uso del término "preembrión" en la literatura biomédica desde su origen hasta la actualidad

  1. Modesto Ferrer Colomer
  2. Luis Miguel Pastor
Journal:
Cuadernos de bioética

ISSN: 1132-1989,  2386-3773

Year of publication: 2017

Volume: 28

Issue: 92

Pages: 111-124

Type: Article

DIALNET GOOGLE SCHOLAR lock_openOpen access editor

More publications in: Cuadernos de bioética

Abstract

In this article, we present a review about the use of the term “preembryo” in the scientific literature as well as Bioethics from its origin, back in June 1979, to the end of the year 2014. We analyze their evolution along the time comparing with other terms commonly used in embryology. Also, we show the relevant journals in which this term appears, (offering the impact index within their specific field), and the authors who use it the most. The term “preembryo” arose in the scientific literature in 1979, remaining for about 6 years without reappearing in the scientific literature. Then, after an increase of articles, that covers the 90’s decade, began to decrease its use without having disappeared altogether. Our study also shows that the use of the word “preembryo” has not increased with the passage of time; on the contrary, it is becoming less used in the biomedical literature. This does not occur with other terms that name the embryo before implantation, which have not ceased to increase during these years, both referring to the human species and other animal species. Finally, the term “pre-embryo” appears very little in journals related to the reproduction biology area, but it does so in obstetrics and gynecology, where many articles on assisted reproduction are published. Our findings suggest that, instead of replacing classical embryological terms, the word “preembryo” does not seem to affect the use of them. Likewise, this word has a hypertrophied use in humans without an apparent reason, which would support the artificial nature of this term. Finally, the term “pre-embryo” appears very little in journals of reproduction biology area, but it does so in obstetrics and gynecology, where many articles on assisted reproduction are published. In conclusion, instead of substituting classical embryological terms, the word “pre-embryo” does not seem to affect the use of them and in the current discussions about the human condition of the embryo this term is no longer used.

Bibliographic References

  • American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) nº 347, Using Preimplantation Embryos for Research, [Pub. en línea] http://www.acog.org/from_home/publications/ethics/co347.pdf [Consulta: 21/01/2017].
  • American Fertility Society, “Ethical Consideration of the New Reproductive Technology”, Fertility and Sterility. Sept; 46 (1986), nº 3, suppl, 1s-94s.
  • Barmat LI, Worrilow KC, Paynton BV. “Growth factor expression by human oviduct and buffalo rat liver coculture cells”. Fertility and Sterility. Apr; 67 (4) (1997), 775-779.
  • Barnett D.K., Bavister B.D. “Inhibitory Effect of Glucose and Phosphate on the Second Cleavage Division of Hamster Embryos: is it Linked to Metabolism?”, Human Reproduction. vol 11, nº 1 (1996), 177-183.
  • Bernardi M.L., Delouis C. “Sex-related Differences in the Developmental Rate of in-vitro Madured/in-vitro Fertilized Ovine Embryos”, Human Reproduction. vol 11, nº 3 (1996), 621-626.
  • Chief Medical Officer’s Expert Group, Stem Cell Research: Medical Progress with Responsibility. A Report from the Chief Medical Officer’s Expert Group Reviewing the Potential of Developments in Stem Cell Research and Cell Nuclear Replacement to Benefit Human Health. London, 2001, Department of Health.
  • Convenio de Oviedo, Artículo 18: “Experimentación con embriones in vitro”.
  • Corral García, E. “The juridical desprotection of the human embryos post the new law of human assisted reproduction and the law of biomedical investigation”. Cuadernos de Bioética. 2009; 20(69): 183-200.
  • De Miguel Beriain, I. “El embrión y la biotecnología. Un análisis ético-jurídico”, Biblioteca de Derecho y Ciencias de la Vida. Edit. Comares. Granada. 2004, 149, nota al pie 308.
  • De Sutter P., Dozortsev D., Quian C., Dhont M. “Oocyte Morphology does not Correlate with Fertilization Rate and Embryo Quality after Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection”, Human Reproduction. vol 11, nº 3 (1996), 595-597.
  • Eisenberg, V. H., Schenker, J. G. “The ethical, legal and religious aspects of preembryo research”, European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology. 75 (1997), 11-24, ver 17.
  • ESHRE Task Force on Ethics and Law, “The moral status of the pre-implantation embryo”, Human Reproduction. 16 (2001), 1046-1048, ver 1047.
  • Feng H.L., Wen X.H., Amet T., Presser, S.C. “Effect of Different Co-culture Systems in Early Human Embryo Development”. Human Reproduction. vol 11, nº 7 (1996), 1525-1528.
  • Ferrer Colomer, M., Pastor, L.M. “The preembryo’s short lifetime. The history of a word”. Cuadernos de Bioética. 2012; 23(79): 677-694.
  • Ferrer Colomer, M. El término “preembrión”: génesis, bases biológicas que lo sustentan y uso en la literatura científica y bioética. Tesis doctoral. Universidad de Murcia, 2007: 394.
  • Ferrer Colomer, M., Pastor García, L.M. “Génesis y uso del término ‘pre-embrión’ en la literatura científica actual”. Persona y Bioética, Año 2, nº 2 (1998), 3-27.
  • Grobstein, C. “External Human Fertilization”. Scientific American. vol. 240, (June 1979), 33-43.
  • Gurevich M, Shemesh M. “Induction of cyclooxygenase and prostaglandin E2 production by the bovine preembryo”. Reproduction Fertility and Development. 6 (6) (1994), 687-691.
  • Herranz, G. El embrión ficticio. Historia de un mito biológico. Ediciones Palabra, Madrid, 2013, 41-65.
  • Johnson DE, Hodgen GD. “Syringe-associated toxicity of culture media on mouse and monkey preembryos”.
  • Journal of in Vitro Fertilization and Embryo Transfer. Aug; 8 (4) (1991), 198-201.
  • Jones, D.G., Telfer, B. “Before I was an embryo, I was a pre-embryo: or was I?”. Bioethics. Jan; 9 (1995), 32-49.
  • Jones, H. W. Jr. “The Status of Regulation of Assisted Reproductive Technology in the United States”, Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics. 10 (1993), 331-336, ver 333.
  • Kischer, CW. “The big lie in human embryology: the case of the preembryo”. The Linacre Quarterly. Nov; 64 (1997), 53-61.
  • Kligman I., Benadiva C., Alikani M., Munné S. “The Presence of Multinucleated Blastomeres in Human Embryos is Correlated with Chromosomal Abnormalities”, European Society for Human Reproduction and Embryology, vol 11, nº 7 (1996), 1492-1498.
  • Lacadena, J. R. “La Ley 14/2006 sobre Técnicas de Reproducción Humana Asistida: consideraciones científicas y éticas”, Law and the Human Genome Review. JanJul; 24 (2006), 157-184, ver 161.
  • Machaty Z, Paldi A, Csaki T, et al. “Biopsy and sex determination by PCR of IVF bovine embryos”. Journal of Reproduct and Fertility. Jul; 98 (2) (1993), 467-470.
  • Macklin, R. “Splitting embryos on the slippery slope: ethics and public policy”. Kennedy Institute of Ethics Journal. Sep; 4 (1994), 209-225.
  • Maureen L., C. “The Role of Maternal-Effect Genes in Mammalian Development: Are Mammalian Embryos Really an Exception?”. Stem Cell Reviews and Reports. 12 (2016), 276-284.
  • McCormick, R.A. “Ethics of reproductive technology: AFS recommendations, dissent”. Health Progress. Mar; 68 (1987), 33-37.
  • Mulkay, M. “The triumph of the pre-embryo: interpretations of the human embryo in Parliamentary debate over embryo research”. Social Studies of Science. Nov; 24 (1994), 611-639.
  • Nathanson, B. “Of pre-embryos and Bourbon kings”. Ethics & Medicine. Spring; 8 (1992), 1-3.
  • National Bioethics Advisory Commission, Ethical Issues in Human Stem Cell Research: Report and Recommendations of the National Bioethics Advisory Commission, NBAC, Rockville, MD, 1999.
  • National Institutes of Health (NIH), Report of the Human Embryo Research Panel (HERP). 2 vols. Bethesda, MD: NIH, 1994.
  • Nisker, J. “The Latest Thorn by Any Other Name: GermLine Nuclear Transfer in the Name of ‘Mitochondrial Replacement’”. Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Canada. 37 (9) (2015), 829-831.
  • Pellegrino, E.D. “The pre-embryo: an illusory category of convenience”. Pediatrics in Review. Aug; 20 (1999), e32-34; discussion, e38-39.
  • Piciocchi, C., Martinelli, L. “The change of definitions in a multidisciplinary landscape: the case of human embryo and pre-embryo identification”. Croatian Medical Journal. 57 (2016), 510-515.
  • Pollard J.W., Plante C., Leibo S.P. “Comparison of Development of Pig Zygotes and Embryos in Simple and Complex Culture Media”, Journal of Reproduction and Fertility. 103 (1995), 331-337.
  • Sermonti, G. “The sacrifice of pre-embryos”. Rivista di Biologia. 79 (1986), 377-380.
  • Sermonti. G. “Preembryos for Moloch”. Rivista di Biologia. 79 (1986), 377-378.
  • Sureau, C. “Reproductive medicine – moral, conceptual and ethical considerations”. Bulletin de l’Académie Nationale de Médecine. Jun 7; 178 (1994), 1145-1154.
  • Tauer, C. A. “Embryo Research and Public Policy: a Philosopher’s Appraisal”, Journal of Medicine and Philosophy. 22 (1997), 423-439.
  • Thorne, R., Kischer, C.W. “Embryos, preembryos, and stem cells”. Fertility and Sterility. Dec; 78 (2002), 1355.
  • Vivanco, L., Bartolomé B., San Martín, M y Martínez, A. “Bibliometric analyisis of the use of the term prembryo in scientific literatura”. Journal of the American Society for information science and technology, 62 (5) (2011), 987-991.
  • Voluntary Licensing Authority for Human In vitro Fertilisation and Embryology, Guidelines for both clinical and research applications of Human In vitro Fertilisation, London 1985.
Data source: Dialnet