Literature DB >> 15257825

Effect of PGD on implantation and ongoing pregnancy rates in cases with predominantly macrocephalic spermatozoa.

S Kahraman1, S Sertyel, N Findikli, Y Kumtepe, N Oncu, S Melil, S Unal, H Yelke, P Vanderzwalmen.   

Abstract

Although its occurrence is rare, the presence of large headed or macrocephalic spermatozoa and increased chromosomal abnormality has recently been reported by several groups. Moreover, when intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) was performed with samples containing macrocephalic spermatozoa, lower fertilization and implantation rates result in poor clinical outcome. In order to evaluate the impact of preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) on implantation and ongoing pregnancy rates in these couples, the results of 23 PGD cycles were compared with non-PGD cycles (n = 60) as well as cycles with absolute teratozoospermia (having zero normal morphology) with (n = 14) or without PGD (n = 66). Out of 82 embryos biopsied in the macrocephalic sperm group, abnormalities were detected in 46.4% of the embryos analysed. Most of the abnormalities were trisomies (37.0%) and complex aneuploidies (51.9%). A 33.3% pregnancy rate was achieved by selectively transferring euploid embryos after PGD with the statistically higher implantation rate of 25.0% compared with non-PGD cycles (IR: 12.3%, P < 0.01). Moreover, only one missed abortion (14.3%) was observed in the PGD group, whereas seven of the 15 pregnancies resulted in abortion in the non-PGD group (46.7%). Preliminary results indicate that patients should be counselled for increased chromosomal abnormality and a possible beneficial effect of eliminating chromosomally abnormal embryos with PGD on a bortion rates.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15257825     DOI: 10.1016/s1472-6483(10)62114-1

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Reprod Biomed Online        ISSN: 1472-6483            Impact factor:   3.828


  6 in total

Review 1.  PGS-FISH in reproductive medicine and perspective directions for improvement: a systematic review.

Authors:  Sandra Zamora; Ana Clavero; M Carmen Gonzalvo; Juan de Dios Luna Del Castillo; Jose Antonio Roldán-Nofuentes; Juan Mozas; Jose Antonio Castilla
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2011-06-29       Impact factor: 3.412

2.  A new AURKC mutation causing macrozoospermia: implications for human spermatogenesis and clinical diagnosis.

Authors:  Mariem Ben Khelifa; Raoudha Zouari; Radu Harbuz; Lazhar Halouani; Christophe Arnoult; Joël Lunardi; Pierre F Ray
Journal:  Mol Hum Reprod       Date:  2011-07-06       Impact factor: 4.025

3.  Macrozoospermia: screening for the homozygous c.144delC mutation in AURKC gene in infertile men and estimation of its heterozygosity frequency in the Tunisian population.

Authors:  Houda Ghédir; Moez Gribaa; Ons Mamaî; Ilhem Ben Charfeddine; Asma Braham; Abdelbasset Amara; Meriem Mehdi; Ali Saad; Samira Ibala-Romdhane
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2015-09-04       Impact factor: 3.412

4.  Preimplantation genetic screening: an effective testing for infertile and repeated miscarriage patients?

Authors:  Ning Wang; Ying-Ming Zheng; Lei Li; Fan Jin
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol Int       Date:  2010-07-01

5.  Can Comprehensive Chromosome Screening Technology Improve IVF/ICSI Outcomes? A Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Minghao Chen; Shiyou Wei; Junyan Hu; Song Quan
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-10-15       Impact factor: 3.240

6.  Is intracouple assisted reproductive technology an option for men with large-headed spermatozoa? A literature review and a decision guide proposal.

Authors:  Bruno Guthauser; Xavier Pollet-Villard; Florence Boitrelle; Francois Vialard
Journal:  Basic Clin Androl       Date:  2016-07-08
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.