Literature DB >> 27256482

Preimplantation genetic screening 2.0: the theory.

Joep Geraedts1, Karen Sermon2.   

Abstract

During the last few years a new generation of preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) has been introduced. In this paper, an overview of the different aspects of this so-called PGS 2.0 with respect to the why (what are the indications), the when (which developmental stage, i.e. which material should be studied) and the how (which molecular technique should be used) is given. With respect to the aims it is clear that PGS 2.0 can be used for a variety of indications. However, the beneficial effect of PGS 2.0 has not been proved yet in RCTs. It is clear that cleavage stage is not the optimal stage for biopsy. Almost all advocates of PGS 2.0 prefer trophectoderm biopsy. There are many new methods that allow the study of complete aneuploidy with respect to one or more of the 24 chromosomes. Because of the improved vitrification methods, selection of fresh embryos for transfer is more and more often replaced by frozen embryo transfer. The main goal of PGS has always been the improvement of IVF success. However, success is defined by different authors in many different ways. This makes it very difficult to compare the outcomes of different studies. In conclusion, the introduction of PGS 2.0 will depend on the success of the new biopsy strategies in combination with the analysis of all 24 chromosomes. It remains to be seen which approach will be the most successful and for which specific groups of patients.
© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Entities:  

Keywords:  aneuploidy; array comparative genomic hybridization; blastocyst biopsy; blastomere biopsy; chromosomal abnormalities; comprehensive chromosome screening; polar body biopsy; preimplantation genetic screening

Mesh:

Year:  2016        PMID: 27256482      PMCID: PMC4986416          DOI: 10.1093/molehr/gaw033

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Mol Hum Reprod        ISSN: 1360-9947            Impact factor:   4.025


  43 in total

1.  Single cell CGH analysis reveals a high degree of mosaicism in human embryos from patients with balanced structural chromosome aberrations.

Authors:  H Malmgren; S Sahlén; J Inzunza; M Aho; B Rosenlund; M Fridström; O Hovatta; L Ahrlund-Richter; M Nordenskjöld; E Blennow
Journal:  Mol Hum Reprod       Date:  2002-05       Impact factor: 4.025

Review 2.  Impact of blastocyst biopsy and comprehensive chromosome screening technology on preimplantation genetic screening: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Elias M Dahdouh; Jacques Balayla; Juan Antonio García-Velasco
Journal:  Reprod Biomed Online       Date:  2014-12-11       Impact factor: 3.828

3.  Innovative reproductive technologies: risks and responsibilities.

Authors:  W Dondorp; G de Wert
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2011-04-18       Impact factor: 6.918

Review 4.  Cleavage stage versus blastocyst stage embryo transfer in assisted reproductive technology.

Authors:  Demián Glujovsky; Debbie Blake; Cindy Farquhar; Ariel Bardach
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2012-07-11

Review 5.  Conception to ongoing pregnancy: the 'black box' of early pregnancy loss.

Authors:  N S Macklon; J P M Geraedts; B C J M Fauser
Journal:  Hum Reprod Update       Date:  2002 Jul-Aug       Impact factor: 15.610

6.  Comprehensive analysis of karyotypic mosaicism between trophectoderm and inner cell mass.

Authors:  D S Johnson; C Cinnioglu; R Ross; A Filby; G Gemelos; M Hill; A Ryan; D Smotrich; M Rabinowitz; M J Murray
Journal:  Mol Hum Reprod       Date:  2010-07-19       Impact factor: 4.025

Review 7.  The why, the how and the when of PGS 2.0: current practices and expert opinions of fertility specialists, molecular biologists, and embryologists.

Authors:  Karen Sermon; Antonio Capalbo; Jacques Cohen; Edith Coonen; Martine De Rycke; Anick De Vos; Joy Delhanty; Francesco Fiorentino; Norbert Gleicher; Georg Griesinger; Jamie Grifo; Alan Handyside; Joyce Harper; Georgia Kokkali; Sebastiaan Mastenbroek; David Meldrum; Marcos Meseguer; Markus Montag; Santiago Munné; Laura Rienzi; Carmen Rubio; Katherine Scott; Richard Scott; Carlos Simon; Jason Swain; Nathan Treff; Filippo Ubaldi; Rita Vassena; Joris Robert Vermeesch; Willem Verpoest; Dagan Wells; Joep Geraedts
Journal:  Mol Hum Reprod       Date:  2016-06-02       Impact factor: 4.025

8.  Single-nucleotide polymorphism microarray-based preimplantation genetic diagnosis is likely to improve the clinical outcome for translocation carriers.

Authors:  Y-Q Tan; K Tan; S-P Zhang; F Gong; D-H Cheng; B Xiong; C-F Lu; X-C Tang; K-L Luo; G Lin; G-X Lu
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2013-07-11       Impact factor: 6.918

9.  Selection of single blastocysts for fresh transfer via standard morphology assessment alone and with array CGH for good prognosis IVF patients: results from a randomized pilot study.

Authors:  Zhihong Yang; Jiaen Liu; Gary S Collins; Shala A Salem; Xiaohong Liu; Sarah S Lyle; Alison C Peck; E Scott Sills; Rifaat D Salem
Journal:  Mol Cytogenet       Date:  2012-05-02       Impact factor: 2.009

10.  Polar body array CGH for prediction of the status of the corresponding oocyte. Part I: clinical results.

Authors:  Joep Geraedts; Markus Montag; M Cristina Magli; Sjoerd Repping; Alan Handyside; Catherine Staessen; Joyce Harper; Andreas Schmutzler; John Collins; Veerle Goossens; Hans van der Ven; Katerina Vesela; Luca Gianaroli
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2011-09-09       Impact factor: 6.918

View more
  18 in total

1.  Logistic regression analyses of factors affecting the euploidy of blastocysts undergoing in vitro fertilization and preimplantation genetic testing.

Authors:  Zhiping Zhang; Lei Zhang; Yaoqin Wang; Xingyu Bi; Lixia Liang; Yuan Yuan; Dan Su; Xueqing Wu
Journal:  Medicine (Baltimore)       Date:  2022-07-01       Impact factor: 1.817

Review 2.  The why, the how and the when of PGS 2.0: current practices and expert opinions of fertility specialists, molecular biologists, and embryologists.

Authors:  Karen Sermon; Antonio Capalbo; Jacques Cohen; Edith Coonen; Martine De Rycke; Anick De Vos; Joy Delhanty; Francesco Fiorentino; Norbert Gleicher; Georg Griesinger; Jamie Grifo; Alan Handyside; Joyce Harper; Georgia Kokkali; Sebastiaan Mastenbroek; David Meldrum; Marcos Meseguer; Markus Montag; Santiago Munné; Laura Rienzi; Carmen Rubio; Katherine Scott; Richard Scott; Carlos Simon; Jason Swain; Nathan Treff; Filippo Ubaldi; Rita Vassena; Joris Robert Vermeesch; Willem Verpoest; Dagan Wells; Joep Geraedts
Journal:  Mol Hum Reprod       Date:  2016-06-02       Impact factor: 4.025

3.  Preimplantation Genetic Testing for Aneuploidy Improves Clinical, Gestational, and Neonatal Outcomes in Advanced Maternal Age Patients Without Compromising Cumulative Live-Birth Rate.

Authors:  Laura Sacchi; Elena Albani; Amalia Cesana; Antonella Smeraldi; Valentina Parini; Marco Fabiani; Maurizio Poli; Antonio Capalbo; Paolo Emanuele Levi-Setti
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2019-11-12       Impact factor: 3.412

4.  Decision-making surrounding the use of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy reveals misunderstanding regarding its benefit.

Authors:  Molly M Quinn; Flor Juarez-Hernandez; Molly Dunn; Richard Jason Okamura; Marcelle I Cedars; Mitchell P Rosen
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2018-10-18       Impact factor: 3.412

5.  Letrozole+ GnRH antagonist stimulation protocol in poor ovarian responders undergoing intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles: An RCT.

Authors:  Mahbod Ebrahimi; Firouzeh Akbari-Asbagh; Mojgan Ghalandar-Attar
Journal:  Int J Reprod Biomed (Yazd)       Date:  2017-02

Review 6.  Recurrent pregnancy loss: current perspectives.

Authors:  Hady El Hachem; Vincent Crepaux; Pascale May-Panloup; Philippe Descamps; Guillaume Legendre; Pierre-Emmanuel Bouet
Journal:  Int J Womens Health       Date:  2017-05-17

7.  Towards a better understanding of preimplantation genetic screening for aneuploidy: insights from a virtual trial for women under the age of 40 when transferring embryos one at a time.

Authors:  Paul N Scriven
Journal:  Reprod Biol Endocrinol       Date:  2017-06-30       Impact factor: 5.211

8.  Retrospective Study to Compare Frozen-Thawed Embryo Transfer with Fresh Embryo Transfer on Pregnancy Outcome Following Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection for Male Infertility.

Authors:  Xue Wang; Huan Wu; Xiaojin He; Huanhuan Jiang; Longmei Wu; Yuping Xu; Ping Zhou; Zhaolian Wei; Yunxia Cao
Journal:  Med Sci Monit       Date:  2018-04-30

9.  Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies (abnormal number of chromosomes) in in vitro fertilisation.

Authors:  Simone Cornelisse; Miriam Zagers; Elena Kostova; Kathrin Fleischer; Madelon van Wely; Sebastiaan Mastenbroek
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2020-09-08

Review 10.  Recent developments in genetics and medically assisted reproduction: from research to clinical applications.

Authors:  J C Harper; K Aittomäki; P Borry; M C Cornel; G de Wert; W Dondorp; J Geraedts; L Gianaroli; K Ketterson; I Liebaers; K Lundin; H Mertes; M Morris; G Pennings; K Sermon; C Spits; S Soini; A P A van Montfoort; A Veiga; J R Vermeesch; S Viville; M Macek
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2017-12-04       Impact factor: 4.246

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.