Literature DB >> 18156649

Diagnostic efficiency, embryonic development and clinical outcome after the biopsy of one or two blastomeres for preimplantation genetic diagnosis.

Veerle Goossens1, Martine De Rycke, Anick De Vos, Catherine Staessen, An Michiels, Willem Verpoest, André Van Steirteghem, Catherine Bertrand, Inge Liebaers, Paul Devroey, Karen Sermon.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Preimplantation genetic diagnosis or screening (PGD, PGS) involves embryo biopsy on Day 3. Opting for one- or two-cell biopsy is a balance between the lowest risk for misdiagnosis on the one hand and the highest chance for a pregnancy on the other hand.
METHODS: A prospective controlled trial was designed and 592 ICSI cycles were randomly assigned to the one-cell (group I) or the two-cell group (group II). Primary outcomes were diagnostic efficiency and embryonic development to delivery with live birth (analysed by cycle). The false-positive rate for the PCR cycles is presented as a secondary outcome (analysed by embryo).
RESULTS: A strong significant correlation was observed between embryonic developmental stage on Day 3 and post-biopsy in vitro development on Day 5 (P < 0.0001). The influence of the intervention on Day 3 was less significant (P = 0.007): the biopsy of one cell is less invasive than the biopsy of two cells. PCR diagnostic efficiency was 88.6% in group I and 96.4% in group II (P = 0.008). For the fluorescence in situ hybridization (FISH) PGD cycles no significant difference in efficiency was obtained (98.2 and 97.5% in group I and II, respectively). Similar delivery rates with live birth per started cycle were obtained [58/287 or 20.2% in group I versus 52/303 or 17.2% in group II, P = 0.358; the absolute risk reduction = 3.05%; 95% confidence interval (CI): -3.24, 9.34]. Post-PGD PCR reanalysis showed six false positives in 97 embryos (6.2%) in group II and none in group I (91 embryos reanalysed). No false negatives were found.
CONCLUSIONS: While removal of two blastomeres decreases the likelihood of blastocyst formation, compared with removal of one blastomere, Day 3 in vitro developmental stage is a stronger predictor for Day 5 developmental potential than the removal of one or two cells. The biopsy of only one cell significantly lowers the efficiency of a PCR-based diagnosis, whereas the efficiency of the FISH PGD procedure remains similar whether one or two cells are removed. Delivery rates with live birth per started cycle were not significantly different.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 18156649     DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dem327

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Reprod        ISSN: 0268-1161            Impact factor:   6.918


  31 in total

1.  Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) for Huntington's disease: the experience of three European centres.

Authors:  Maartje C Van Rij; Marjan De Rademaeker; Céline Moutou; Jos C F M Dreesen; Martine De Rycke; Inge Liebaers; Joep P M Geraedts; Christine E M De Die-Smulders; Stéphane Viville
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2011-11-09       Impact factor: 4.246

2.  Preimplantation genetic diagnosis for chromosome rearrangements - one blastomere biopsy versus two blastomere biopsy.

Authors:  D Brodie; C E Beyer; E Osborne; V Kralevski; S Rasi; T Osianlis
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2012-05-12       Impact factor: 3.412

Review 3.  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

Review 4.  Preimplantation genetic screening: does it help or hinder IVF treatment and what is the role of the embryo?

Authors:  Kim Dao Ly; Ashok Agarwal; Zsolt Peter Nagy
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2011-07-09       Impact factor: 3.412

5.  [Assisted reproductive techniques: key procedures and results in Germany and Europe].

Authors:  F B Kolodziej; P Hüppe; T Katzorke
Journal:  Urologe A       Date:  2011-01       Impact factor: 0.639

Review 6.  Preimplantation genetic diagnosis for inherited neurological disorders.

Authors:  Ilan Tur-Kaspa; Roohi Jeelani; P Murali Doraiswamy
Journal:  Nat Rev Neurol       Date:  2014-05-27       Impact factor: 42.937

7.  Preimplantation genetic testing with HLA matching: from counseling to birth and beyond.

Authors:  M De Rycke; A De Vos; F Belva; V Berckmoes; M Bonduelle; A Buysse; K Keymolen; I Liebaers; J Nekkebroeck; P Verdyck; W Verpoest
Journal:  J Hum Genet       Date:  2020-02-27       Impact factor: 3.172

Review 8.  Preimplantation genetic diagnosis: state of the art 2011.

Authors:  Joyce C Harper; Sioban B Sengupta
Journal:  Hum Genet       Date:  2011-07-12       Impact factor: 4.132

Review 9.  Transmission of mitochondrial DNA diseases and ways to prevent them.

Authors:  Joanna Poulton; Marcos R Chiaratti; Flávio V Meirelles; Stephen Kennedy; Dagan Wells; Ian J Holt
Journal:  PLoS Genet       Date:  2010-08-12       Impact factor: 5.917

Review 10.  Approaches to improve the diagnosis and management of infertility.

Authors:  P Devroey; B C J M Fauser; K Diedrich
Journal:  Hum Reprod Update       Date:  2009-04-20       Impact factor: 15.610

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.