Literature DB >> 20828683

Ovarian stimulation and the risk of aneuploid conceptions.

Jamie A M Massie1, Lora K Shahine, Amin A Milki, Lynn M Westphal, Ruth B Lathi.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To examine the rate of aneuploidy in missed abortions in patients who conceived after FSH ovarian stimulation compared with women who conceived in a natural cycle.
DESIGN: Retrospective cohort.
SETTING: Academic reproductive endocrinology and infertility center. PATIENT(S): Women with karyotyping of products of conception (POC) from a missed abortion from January 1999 through August 2007. The rate of aneuploidy was compared between patients with a history of infertility who conceived naturally and patients with a history of infertility who conceived with FSH treatment. INTERVENTION(S): Ovarian stimulation with FSH, intrauterine insemination, and in vitro fertilization; genetic testing of POC after dilation and curettage. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Embryonic karyotype. RESULT(S): A total of 229 pregnancies met inclusion criteria, and of these, 64% had an abnormal karyotype. The rate of aneuploidy was 63% in the study group and 70% in the control group. This difference was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION(S): The incidence of embryonic aneuploidy was not higher in pregnancies conceived with FSH stimulation compared with spontaneous conceptions in infertility patients. This suggests that exogenous FSH exposure does not increase the risk of aneuploidy. Published by Elsevier Inc.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20828683     DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.07.1088

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Fertil Steril        ISSN: 0015-0282            Impact factor:   7.329


  9 in total

1.  Contributing factors for the incidence of aneuploidy in older patients undergoing intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles.

Authors:  Daniela Paes de Almeida Ferreira Braga; Amanda S Setti; Rita de Cássia S Figueira; Assumpto Iaconelli; Edson Borges
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2012-05-29       Impact factor: 3.412

Review 2.  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

3.  Patient selection criteria for blastocyst transfers in extended embryo culture programs.

Authors:  Daniela Paes Almeida Ferreira Braga; Amanda S Setti; Rita de Cássia S Figueira; Rogério Bonassi Machado; Assumpto Iaconelli; Edson Borges
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2012-10-11       Impact factor: 3.412

4.  Follicular fluid protein content (FSH, LH, PG4, E2 and AMH) and polar body aneuploidy.

Authors:  I Hammoud; F Vialard; M Bergere; M Albert; D Molina Gomes; M Adler; L Malagrida; M Bailly; R Wainer; J Selva
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2012-08-14       Impact factor: 3.412

5.  Lessons from elective in vitro fertilization (IVF) in, principally, non-infertile women.

Authors:  Norbert Gleicher; Ann Kim; Andrea Weghofer; David H Barad
Journal:  Reprod Biol Endocrinol       Date:  2012-06-20       Impact factor: 5.211

6.  Association of ovarian stimulation and embryonic aneuploidy in in vitro fertilization cycles with preimplantation genetic testing: A narrative systematic review.

Authors:  Jorge Rodriguez-Purata; Maria Jose Gomez-Cuesta; Enrique Cervantes-Bravo
Journal:  JBRA Assist Reprod       Date:  2022-04-17

7.  Prevalence and risk of Down syndrome in monozygotic and dizygotic multiple pregnancies in Europe: implications for prenatal screening.

Authors:  B Boyle; J K Morris; R McConkey; E Garne; M Loane; M C Addor; M Gatt; M Haeusler; A Latos-Bielenska; N Lelong; R McDonnell; C Mullaney; M O'Mahony; H Dolk
Journal:  BJOG       Date:  2014-02-04       Impact factor: 6.531

8.  The Majority of Resorptions in Old Mice Are Euploid.

Authors:  Yong Tao; X Johné Liu
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-12-04       Impact factor: 3.240

9.  Different culture method changing CD105 expression in amniotic fluid MSCs without affecting differentiation ability or immune function.

Authors:  Ding Wang; Nengqing Liu; Yingjun Xie; Bing Song; Shu Kong; Xiaofang Sun
Journal:  J Cell Mol Med       Date:  2020-03-02       Impact factor: 5.310

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.