Literature DB >> 23949213

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.

Martin D Keltz1, Mario Vega, Ido Sirota, Matthew Lederman, Erin L Moshier, Eric Gonzales, Daniel Stein.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To determine benefits of cleavage-stage preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) by array comparative genomic hybridization (CGH).
METHODS: A retrospective case-control study was performed at a tertiary care university-affiliated medical center. Implantation rate was looked at as a primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included clinical and ongoing pregnancy rates, as well as multiple pregnancy and miscarriage rates. Thirty five patients underwent 39 fresh cycles with PGS by aCGH and 311 similar patients underwent 394 invitro fertilization cycles. RESULT(S): The implantation rate in the CGH group doubled when compared to the control group (52.63 % vs. 19.15 %, p = < 0.001), clinical pregnancy rate was higher (69.23 % vs. 43.91 %, p = 0.0002), ongoing pregnancy rate almost doubled (61.54 % vs. 32.49 %, p = < 0.0001), multiple pregnancy rate decreased (8.33 % vs. 34.38 %, p = 0.0082) and miscarriage rate trended lower (11.11 % vs. 26.01 %, p = 0.13).
CONCLUSION: Cleavage stage PGS with CGH is a feasible and safe option for aneuploidy screening that shows excellent outcomes when used in fresh cycles. This is the first report of cleavage stage PGS by CGH showing improved ongoing pregnancy rates.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23949213      PMCID: PMC3824853          DOI: 10.1007/s10815-013-0070-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet        ISSN: 1058-0468            Impact factor:   3.412


  37 in total

Review 1.  Human cumulus cells as biomarkers for embryo and pregnancy outcomes.

Authors:  Said Assou; Delphine Haouzi; John De Vos; Samir Hamamah
Journal:  Mol Hum Reprod       Date:  2010-04-29       Impact factor: 4.025

Review 2.  Aneuploidy screening for embryo selection.

Authors:  Elpida Fragouli; Dagan Wells
Journal:  Semin Reprod Med       Date:  2012-06-21       Impact factor: 1.303

3.  Embryo incubation and selection in a time-lapse monitoring system improves pregnancy outcome compared with a standard incubator: a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Marcos Meseguer; Irene Rubio; Maria Cruz; Natalia Basile; Julian Marcos; Antonio Requena
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2012-09-10       Impact factor: 7.329

4.  In vitro fertilisation treatment and factors affecting success.

Authors:  Jack Yu Jen Huang; Zev Rosenwaks
Journal:  Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol       Date:  2012-10-09       Impact factor: 5.237

5.  Idiopathic recurrent miscarriage is caused mostly by aneuploid embryos.

Authors:  Brooke Hodes-Wertz; Jamie Grifo; Shahin Ghadir; Brian Kaplan; Carl A Laskin; Michael Glassner; Santiago Munné
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2012-06-07       Impact factor: 7.329

6.  Embryo quality, blastocyst and ongoing pregnancy rates in oocyte donation patients whose embryos were monitored by time-lapse imaging.

Authors:  María Cruz; Blanca Gadea; Nicolás Garrido; Kamilla Søe Pedersen; Mar Martínez; Inma Pérez-Cano; Manuel Muñoz; Marcos Meseguer
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2011-03-11       Impact factor: 3.412

7.  What next for preimplantation genetic screening (PGS)? A position statement from the ESHRE PGD Consortium Steering Committee.

Authors:  Joyce Harper; Edith Coonen; Martine De Rycke; Francesco Fiorentino; Joep Geraedts; Veerle Goossens; Gary Harton; Celine Moutou; Tugce Pehlivan Budak; Pam Renwick; Sioban Sengupta; Joanne Traeger-Synodinos; Katerina Vesela
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2010-02-02       Impact factor: 6.918

8.  Pregnancy achieved by transfer of a single blastocyst selected by time-lapse monitoring.

Authors:  Csaba Pribenszky; Szabolcs Mátyás; Péter Kovács; Eszter Losonczi; János Zádori; Gábor Vajta
Journal:  Reprod Biomed Online       Date:  2010-04-24       Impact factor: 3.828

9.  Prediction of in-vitro developmental competence of early cleavage-stage mouse embryos with compact time-lapse equipment.

Authors:  Csaba Pribenszky; Eszter Losonczi; Miklós Molnár; Zsolt Lang; Szabolcs Mátyás; Klára Rajczy; Katalin Molnár; Péter Kovács; Péter Nagy; Jason Conceicao; Gábor Vajta
Journal:  Reprod Biomed Online       Date:  2010-01-25       Impact factor: 3.828

10.  SNP microarray-based 24 chromosome aneuploidy screening is significantly more consistent than FISH.

Authors:  Nathan R Treff; Brynn Levy; Jing Su; Lesley E Northrop; Xin Tao; Richard T Scott
Journal:  Mol Hum Reprod       Date:  2010-05-19       Impact factor: 4.025

View more
  15 in total

1.  Pregnancy rates after pre-implantation genetic screening for aneuploidy are only superior when trophectoderm biopsy is performed on hatching embryos.

Authors:  Sonali Singh; Elie Hobeika; Eric S Knochenhauer; Michael L Traub
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2019-01-15       Impact factor: 3.412

2.  Pregnancy and child developmental outcomes after preimplantation genetic screening: a meta-analytic and systematic review.

Authors:  Misaki N Natsuaki; Laura M Dimler
Journal:  World J Pediatr       Date:  2018-07-31       Impact factor: 2.764

Review 3.  Recent advances in preimplantation genetic diagnosis and screening.

Authors:  Lina Lu; Bo Lv; Kevin Huang; Zhigang Xue; Xianmin Zhu; Guoping Fan
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2016-06-07       Impact factor: 3.412

4.  Noninvasive chromosome screening of human embryos by genome sequencing of embryo culture medium for in vitro fertilization.

Authors:  Juanjuan Xu; Rui Fang; Li Chen; Daozhen Chen; Jian-Ping Xiao; Weimin Yang; Honghua Wang; Xiaoqing Song; Ting Ma; Shiping Bo; Chong Shi; Jun Ren; Lei Huang; Li-Yi Cai; Bing Yao; X Sunney Xie; Sijia Lu
Journal:  Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A       Date:  2016-09-29       Impact factor: 11.205

5.  Discrepant diagnosis rate of array comparative genomic hybridization in thawed euploid blastocysts.

Authors:  Ashley W Tiegs; Brooke Hodes-Wertz; David H McCulloh; Santiago Munné; James A Grifo
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2016-03-17       Impact factor: 3.357

6.  Can Comprehensive Chromosome Screening Technology Improve IVF/ICSI Outcomes? A Meta-Analysis.

Authors:  Minghao Chen; Shiyou Wei; Junyan Hu; Song Quan
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-10-15       Impact factor: 3.240

Review 7.  Current status of comprehensive chromosome screening for elective single-embryo transfer.

Authors:  Ming-Yih Wu; Kuang-Han Chao; Chin-Der Chen; Li-Jung Chang; Shee-Uan Chen; Yu-Shih Yang
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol Int       Date:  2014-06-01

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

9.  A pilot proof-of-principle study to compare fresh and vitrified cycle preimplantation genetic screening by chromosome microarray and next generation sequencing.

Authors:  Gwo-Chin Ma; Hsin-Fu Chen; Yu-Shih Yang; Wen-Hsiang Lin; Feng-Po Tsai; Chi-Fang Lin; Chi Chiu; Ming Chen
Journal:  Mol Cytogenet       Date:  2016-03-21       Impact factor: 2.009

10.  The IMSI Procedure Improves Laboratory and Clinical Outcomes Without Compromising the Aneuploidy Rate When Compared to the Classical ICSI Procedure.

Authors:  Daniel Luna; Roly Hilario; Julio Dueñas-Chacón; Rocío Romero; Patricia Zavala; Lucy Villegas; Javier García-Ferreyra
Journal:  Clin Med Insights Reprod Health       Date:  2015-11-12
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.