Literature DB >> 16168220

Preimplantation testing for chromosomal disorders improves reproductive outcome of poor-prognosis patients.

Y Verlinsky1, I Tur-Kaspa, J Cieslak, A Bernal, R Morris, M Taranissi, B Kaplan, A Kuliev.   

Abstract

The clinical impact of PGD was evaluated through the analysis of the reproductive outcome before and after PGD in the same group of poor prognosis IVF patients, undergoing PGD for chromosomal abnormalities. Based on a series of 2359 PGD cycles, resulting in the establishment of 498 chromosomal abnormality-free clinical pregnancies, the reproductive history prior to PGD was analysed. Of 483 previous pregnancies analysed in patients with 432 pregnancies generated after PGD for aneuploidies, 328 (68%) ended in spontaneous abortions, in contrast to 28.4% after PGD, with only 155 (32%) resulting in deliveries, compared with 71.9% take-home baby rates after PGD. The patients experienced 315 previous IVF attempts, resulting in the transfer of 706 embryos in 308 cycles, of which only 49 (6.9%) implanted, compared with a 34.9% implantation rate observed in the same patients after PGD. Similar analysis of the previous reproductive outcomes of 45 carriers of balanced translocations achieving pregnancies following PGD, showed even stronger clinical impact, with a reduction of spontaneous abortions from 87.8% to 17.8%, and improvement of take-home baby rate from 11.5% to 81.4% after PGD. The results demonstrate a strong clinical impact of PGD, resulting in improvement of implantation rate, reduction of spontaneous abortions and increase in the take-home baby rate.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16168220     DOI: 10.1016/s1472-6483(10)60961-3

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


  20 in total

1.  Preimplantation genetic diagnosis for couples with a Robertsonian translocation: practical information for genetic counseling.

Authors:  Eun Mi Chang; Ji Eun Han; In Pyung Kwak; Woo Sik Lee; Tae Ki Yoon; Sung Han Shim
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2011-11-12       Impact factor: 3.412

2.  Reproductive outcomes in men with karyotype abnormalities: Case report and review of the literature.

Authors:  Taylor P Kohn; Raul Clavijo; Ranjith Ramasamy; Tariq Hakky; Aravind Candrashekar; Dolores J Lamb; Larry I Lipshultz
Journal:  Can Urol Assoc J       Date:  2015-09-09       Impact factor: 1.862

3.  Preconceptional diagnosis for Robertsonian translocation as an alternative to preimplantation genetic diagnosis in two situations: a pilot study.

Authors:  D Molina Gomes; I Hammoud; M Bailly; M Bergere; R Wainer; J Selva; F Vialard
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2009-01-28       Impact factor: 3.412

4.  Reproductive outcomes following preimplantation genetic diagnosis using fluorescence in situ hybridization for 52 translocation carrier couples with a history of recurrent pregnancy loss.

Authors:  Keiichi Kato; Naoki Aoyama; Nami Kawasaki; Hiroko Hayashi; Tang Xiaohui; Takashi Abe; Tomoko Kuroda
Journal:  J Hum Genet       Date:  2016-05-19       Impact factor: 3.172

5.  Interchromosomal effect in carriers of translocations and inversions assessed by preimplantation genetic testing for structural rearrangements (PGT-SR).

Authors:  E Mateu-Brull; L Rodrigo; V Peinado; A Mercader; I Campos-Galindo; F Bronet; S García-Herrero; M Florensa; M Milán; C Rubio
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2019-11-06       Impact factor: 3.412

Review 6.  Chromosomal disorders and male infertility.

Authors:  Gary L Harton; Helen G Tempest
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2011-11-28       Impact factor: 3.285

7.  The number of biopsied trophectoderm cells may affect pregnancy outcomes.

Authors:  Luis Guzman; D Nuñez; R López; N Inoue; J Portella; F Vizcarra; L Noriega-Portella; L Noriega-Hoces; S Munné
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2018-10-17       Impact factor: 3.412

Review 8.  Unraveling preimplantation genetic diagnosis for high-risk couples: implications for nurses at the front line of care.

Authors:  Patricia E Hershberger; Catherine Schoenfeld; Ilan Tur-Kaspa
Journal:  Nurs Womens Health       Date:  2011 Feb-Mar

9.  What next for preimplantation genetic screening? High mitotic chromosome instability rate provides the biological basis for the low success rate.

Authors:  Evelyne Vanneste; Thierry Voet; Cindy Melotte; Sophie Debrock; Karen Sermon; Catherine Staessen; Inge Liebaers; Jean-Pierre Fryns; Thomas D'Hooghe; Joris R Vermeesch
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2009-07-24       Impact factor: 6.918

10.  Preclinical validation of a microarray method for full molecular karyotyping of blastomeres in a 24-h protocol.

Authors:  D S Johnson; G Gemelos; J Baner; A Ryan; C Cinnioglu; M Banjevic; R Ross; M Alper; B Barrett; J Frederick; D Potter; B Behr; M Rabinowitz
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2010-01-24       Impact factor: 6.918

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.