Literature DB >> 18583331

Preimplantation genetic screening in women of advanced maternal age caused a decrease in clinical pregnancy rate: a randomized controlled trial.

T Hardarson1, C Hanson, K Lundin, T Hillensjö, L Nilsson, J Stevic, E Reismer, K Borg, M Wikland, C Bergh.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Advanced maternal age (AMA) is an important parameter that negatively influences the clinical pregnancy rate in IVF, in particular owing to the increased embryo aneuploidy rate. It has thus been suggested that only transferring euploid embryos in this patient group would improve the pregnancy rate. The purpose of this study was to test whether employing preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) in AMA patients would increase the clinical pregnancy rate.
METHODS: We conducted a two-center, randomized controlled trial (RCT) to analyze the outcome of embryo transfers in AMA patients (>or=38 years of age) after PGS using FISH analysis for chromosomes X, Y, 13, 16, 18, 21 and 22. The PGS group was compared with a control group. The primary outcome measure was clinical pregnancy rate after 6-7 weeks of gestation per randomized patient.
RESULTS: The study was terminated early as an interim analysis showed a very low conditional power of superiority for the primary outcome. Of the 320 patients calculated to be included in the study, 56 and 53 patients were randomized into the PGS and control groups, respectively. The clinical pregnancy rate in the PGS group was 8.9% (95% CI, 2.9-19.6%) compared with 24.5% (95% CI, 13.8-38.3%) in the control group, giving a difference of 15.6% (95% CI, 1.8-29.4%, P = 0.039).
CONCLUSIONS: Although the study was terminated early, this RCT study provides evidence against the use of PGS for AMA patients when performing IVF. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN38014610.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18583331     DOI: 10.1093/humrep/den217

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


  62 in total

1.  A randomized clinical trial comparing embryo culture in a conventional incubator with a time-lapse incubator.

Authors:  Kirstine Kirkegaard; Johnny Juhl Hindkjaer; Marie Louise Grøndahl; Ulrik Schiøler Kesmodel; Hans Jakob Ingerslev
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2012-03-30       Impact factor: 3.412

2.  Twenty-four chromosome FISH in human IVF embryos reveals patterns of post-zygotic chromosome segregation and nuclear organisation.

Authors:  D Ioannou; K G L Fonseka; E J Meershoek; A R Thornhill; A Abogrein; M Ellis; D K Griffin
Journal:  Chromosome Res       Date:  2012-06-29       Impact factor: 5.239

3.  Preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) with Comparative genomic hybridization (CGH) following day 3 single cell blastomere biopsy markedly improves IVF outcomes while lowering multiple pregnancies and miscarriages.

Authors:  Martin D Keltz; Mario Vega; Ido Sirota; Matthew Lederman; Erin L Moshier; Eric Gonzales; Daniel Stein
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2013-08-16       Impact factor: 3.412

Review 4.  IVF/ICSI with or without preimplantation genetic screening for aneuploidy in couples without genetic disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Miguel A Checa; Pablo Alonso-Coello; Ivan Solà; Ana Robles; Ramón Carreras; Juan Balasch
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2009-07-24       Impact factor: 3.412

Review 5.  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 6.  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

Review 7.  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

8.  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

9.  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

10.  What next for preimplantation genetic screening? A polar body approach!

Authors:  Joep Geraedts; John Collins; Luca Gianaroli; Veerle Goossens; Alan Handyside; Joyce Harper; Markus Montag; Sjoerd Repping; Andreas Schmutzler
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2009-12-23       Impact factor: 6.918

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.