Blastocyst biopsy with comprehensive chromosome screening and fresh embryo transfer significantly increases in vitro fertilization implantation and delivery rates: a randomized controlled trial

Scott, Richard T.; Upham, K.M.; Forman, Eric J.; Hong, K.H.; Scott, Katherine; Taylor, Deanne; Tao, Xin; Treff, Nathan R.

doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.04.035

Cited by 542 publications

(417 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

397

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A recent randomised trial [73] showed a significant increase of live birth rates after the screening of chromosome abnormalities in single-cell day 3 biopsies for advanced maternal age: 32.3 % vs 15.5 % (OR 2.6 95%CI 1.3-5.3). Similarly, an improved performance was observed in young women (mean age 32 years) in an RCT with chromosome screening on blastocyst biopsies [72], where the incidence of sustained implantation rates was significantly higher in the screened group (66.4 %) compared with the controls (47.9 %). The authors prudently conclude that "future studies and broad based clinical application will be required to fully define the role of aneuploidy screening" [72].…”

Section: Preimplantation Screeningmentioning

confidence: 67%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Birth defects and congenital health risks in children conceived through assisted reproduction technology (ART): a meeting report

Albertini

Evers²,

Geraedts³

et al. 2014

J Assist Reprod Genet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Assisted Reproduction Treatment (ART) is here to stay. This review addresses the parental background of birth defects, before, during and after conception and focuses both on the underlying subfertility and on the question whether ART as a treatment is an additional contributing factor. Methods Searches were performed in Medline and other databases. Summaries were discussed in a Delphi panel set-up by the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE). Results Several birth defects and adult diseases arise during the earliest stages of ovarian development and oocyte differentiation: this is the case of cleft palate disorders in offspring from female rat exposed to Dioxin during fetal life or the polycystic ovary diseases in female offspring (primates) exposed to elevated androgen concentration during fetal life. Human oocytes and embryos often fail to stop the propagation of aneuploid cells but maintain their ability to repair DNA damages including those introduced by the fertilizing sperm. There is a 29 % increased risk of birth defects in the newborns spontaneously conceived by subfertile couples and the risk is further increased (34 %) when conception is achieved by treating infertlity with ART (Danish IVF Registry). Periconceptional conditions are critical for ART babies: their birth weight is in general smaller (Norvegian Registry) but a more prolonged culture time doubled the number of large babies (Finnish Registry). Conclusion The long-term developmental effects of ART on child and subsequent health as an adult remains a subject worthy of futher monitoring and investigation. Capsule Remaining mindful of the growing body of evidence showing that during gamete production, genetic and epigenetic changes influence offspring health, serves to reinforce the need to continue to monitor ART children.

show abstract

Section: Preimplantation Screeningmentioning

confidence: 67%

“…Studies in favour [72,73] and against [74] have been published, but they also have been criticized because of including only good prognosis patients (not the clinical target group), skewed randomisation and low aneuploidy rates increasing the negative predictive value. There exist only few high quality studies.…”

Section: Preimplantation Screeningmentioning

confidence: 99%

Birth defects and congenital health risks in children conceived through assisted reproduction technology (ART): a meeting report

Albertini

Evers²,

Geraedts³

et al. 2014

J Assist Reprod Genet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In addition, study patients needed at least two good-morphology blastocysts for randomization into either the PGS or morphologic (conventional) selection groups. Among these patients, the implantation rate was substantially higher in the PGS group (79.8 vs. 63.2%), and the PGS group also had higher clinical pregnancy rates compared with controls (93.1 vs. 80.7%) (Scott et al, 2013). Because embryonic genetic factors also contribute to some IVF failures for GS patients, such observations reported with PGS benefits for standard IVF should generalize to GS patients as well.…”

Section: Routine Preimplantation Genetic Screening (Pgs) In Gestationmentioning

confidence: 79%

“…One recent randomized controlled trial assessed the benefits of PGS on implantation and pregnancy rates in a standard IVF context (Scott et al, 2013). Women younger than age 42 years with normal ovarian function (and no more than one prior IVF failure) were eligible to enroll.…”

Section: Routine Preimplantation Genetic Screening (Pgs) In Gestationmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gestational surrogacy and the role of routine embryo screening: Current challenges and future directions for preimplantation genetic testing

Sills

Anderson

McCaffrey³

et al. 2015

Birth Defects Research Pt C

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) is a component of IVF entailing selection of an embryo for transfer on the basis of chromosomal normalcy. If PGS were integrated with single embryo transfer (SET) in a surrogacy setting, this approach could improve pregnancy rates, minimize miscarriage risk, and limit multiple gestations. Even without PGS, pregnancy rates for IVF surrogacy cases are generally satisfactory, especially when treatment utilizes embryos derived from young oocytes and transferred to a healthy surrogate. However, there could be a more general role for PGS in surrogacy, since background aneuploidy in embryos remains a major factor driving implantation failure and miscarriage for all infertility patients. At present, the proportion of IVF cases involving GS is limited, while the number of IVF patients requesting PGS appears to be increasing. In this report, the relevance of PGS for surrogacy in the rapidly changing field of assisted fertility medicine is discussed.Birth Defects Research (Part C) 108:98-102, 2016.V C 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.

show abstract

“…The ability to perform trophectoderm biopsy 3. The ability to vitrify embryos following biopsy A clear benefit to PGS utilizing 23 chromosome pair evaluation at the trophectoderm stage has been demonstrated in multiple prospective randomized trials [15][16][17][18][19][20]. Additionally, the use of embryo vitrification following PGS biopsy has allowed the process of PGS to be performed with much more flexibility, leading to increased utilization of the technology, particularly in the USA.…”

Section: Pgs: Current Statementioning

confidence: 99%

Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy: what technology should you use and what are the differences?

Brezina

Anchan

Kearns

2016

J Assist Reprod Genet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose The purpose of the review was to define the various diagnostic platforms currently available to perform preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy and describe in a clear and balanced manner the various strengths and weaknesses of these technologies. Methods A systematic literature review was conducted. We used the terms "preimplantation genetic testing," "preimplantation genetic diagnosis," "preimplantation genetic screening, " "preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidy," "PGD," "PGS," and "PGD-A" to search through PubMed, ScienceDirect, and Google Scholar from the year 2000 to April 2016. Bibliographies of articles were also searched for relevant studies. When possible, larger randomized controlled trials were used. However, for some emerging data, only data from meeting abstracts were available. Results PGS is emerging as one of the most valuable tools to enhance pregnancy success with assisted reproductive technologies. While all of the current diagnostic platforms currently available have various advantages and disadvantages, some platforms, such as next-generation sequencing (NGS), are capable of evaluating far more data points than has been previously possible. The emerging complexity of different technologies, especially with the utilization of more sophisticated tools such as NGS, requires an understanding by clinicians in order to request the best test for their patients.. Conclusion Ultimately, the choice of which diagnostic platform is utilized should be individualized to the needs of both the clinic and the patient. Such a decision must incorporate the risk tolerance of both the patient and provider, fiscal considerations, and other factors such as the ability to counsel patients on their testing results and how these may or may not impact clinical outcomes.

show abstract

Blastocyst biopsy with comprehensive chromosome screening and fresh embryo transfer significantly increases in vitro fertilization implantation and delivery rates: a randomized controlled trial

Cited by 542 publications

References 16 publications

Birth defects and congenital health risks in children conceived through assisted reproduction technology (ART): a meeting report

Birth defects and congenital health risks in children conceived through assisted reproduction technology (ART): a meeting report

Gestational surrogacy and the role of routine embryo screening: Current challenges and future directions for preimplantation genetic testing

Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy: what technology should you use and what are the differences?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About