Literature DB >> 18948310

What next for preimplantation genetic screening? More randomized controlled trials needed?

S Mastenbroek1, P Scriven, M Twisk, S Viville, F Van der Veen, S Repping.   

Abstract

The recent debate on preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) has raised questions about its routine use in clinical practice. It has been suggested that the most effective way to resolve the debate about the usefulness of PGS is to perform more well-designed and well-executed randomized controlled trials (RCTs). However, in view of the lack of evidence for the effectiveness of PGS and the accumulating evidence for its harmfulness, it is our opinion that it is unethical to perform additional RCTs for the indication advanced maternal age using cleavage stage biopsy.

Entities:  

Mesh：

Year:  2008        PMID： 18948310     DOI： 10.1093/humrep/den376

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


  8 in total

Review 1.  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

2.  Use of parthenogenetic activation of human oocytes as an experimental model for evaluation of polar body based PGD assay performance.

Authors:  Alessio Paffoni; Valentina Paracchini; Stefania Ferrari; Claudia Scarduelli; Manuela Seia; Domenico A Coviello; Guido Ragni
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2011-03-01       Impact factor: 3.412

3.  Quantitative decision-making in preimplantation genetic (aneuploidy) screening (PGS).

Authors:  Michael C Summers; Andrew D Foland
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2009-10-22       Impact factor: 3.412

Review 4.  Is the hypothesis of preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) still supportable? A review.

Authors:  Norbert Gleicher; Raoul Orvieto
Journal:  J Ovarian Res       Date:  2017-03-27       Impact factor: 4.234

5.  A simple and rapid flow cytometry-based assay to identify a competent embryo prior to embryo transfer.

Authors:  Eva Pallinger; Zoltan Bognar; Jozsef Bodis; Timea Csabai; Nelli Farkas; Krisztina Godony; Akos Varnagy; Edit Buzas; Julia Szekeres-Bartho
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2017-01-06       Impact factor: 4.379

6.  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

7.  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

8.  New tools for embryo selection: comprehensive chromosome screening by array comparative genomic hybridization.

Authors:  Lorena Rodrigo; Emilia Mateu; Amparo Mercader; Ana Cristina Cobo; Vanessa Peinado; Miguel Milán; Nasser Al-Asmar; Inmaculada Campos-Galindo; Sandra García-Herrero; Pere Mir; Carlos Simón; Carmen Rubio
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2014-04-29       Impact factor: 3.411
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.