Preimplantation genetic screening for abnormal number of chromosomes (aneuploidies) in in vitro fertilisation or intracytoplasmic sperm injection

Twisk, Moniek; Mastenbroek, Sebastiaan; Wely, Madelon van; Heineman, MJ; Veen, Fulco van der; Repping, Sjoerd

doi:10.1002/14651858.cd005291

Cited by 34 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…ESHRE's previously noted effort to set up a prospectively randomized multicenter study also suggests a healthy level of skepticism, and confirms PGS as an experimental procedure of no proven clinical effectiveness, yet. Published reviews in the literature are confirmatory [6,33,34]. PGS utilization to improve pregnancy and miscarriage rates, based on currently available data [1,2,7,9,29,30,35,36] should, therefore, only occur under study conditions, and with appropriate informed consents.…”

Section: The Current Status Of Pgsmentioning

confidence: 92%

A review of, and commentary on, the ongoing second clinical introduction of preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) to routine IVF practice

Gleicher

Barad

2012

J Assist Reprod Genet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: The Current Status Of Pgsmentioning

confidence: 92%

A review of, and commentary on, the ongoing second clinical introduction of preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) to routine IVF practice

Gleicher

Barad

2012

J Assist Reprod Genet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Many investigators have attempted to achieve this goal, but to date, these studies either have design flaws or have been contradictory in their results. 51,52,54,55 A recent meta-analysis by Twisk et al, 56 which included 2 randomized controlled trials, did not find a statistically significant difference in the clinical pregnancy rate (15% in PGS versus 20% in controls) or live birth rate (11% in PGS versus 15% in controls). Mastenbroek et al 57 published in 2007 a large, multicenter, randomized, double-blinded trial demonstrating that PGS with a 1-cell biopsy using FISH analysis in women between 35 to 41 years not only did not improve but instead significantly reduced the ongoing pregnancy and live birth rates after IVF.…”

Section: Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis and Screeningmentioning

confidence: 98%

Advances and Controversies in Assisted Reproductive Technology

Vela

Luna

Sandler

et al. 2009

Mount Sinai J Medicine

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

As the incidence and awareness of infertility have increased in the last decades, reproductive endocrinologists and scientists have striven to improve the therapeutic options being offered to patients. One of the most advanced and efficient technologies currently being offered is assisted reproductive technology. Among the various techniques that are comprised by assisted reproductive technology, in vitro fertilization is the most widely studied and used, being responsible for approximately 1% of all live births in the United States. As this technology has evolved, many controversies have arisen, and it is the purpose of this article to review what in the authors' opinion are the most current and controversial aspects of the whole process of in vitro fertilization and its related techniques. Mt Sinai J Med 76:506‐520, 2009. © 2009 Mount Sinai School of Medicine

show abstract

“…Implantation and pregnancy rates were similar for women with or without PGS. Even if PGS randomized trials may be criticized [18][19][20], mainly in terms of the methodology of Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis International Society guidelines, a debate on the usefulness of PGS or PCS is ongoing [21][22][23][24]. As yet, no randomized trial has been performed for PCS [25], and the safety of PCS as well as of PGS remains to be demonstrated.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Are zona pellucida laser drilling and polar body biopsy safe for in vitro matured oocytes?

Hammoud

Molina-Gomès

Albert

et al. 2010

J Assist Reprod Genet

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Preconception diagnosis requires first polar body biopsy. When the hole in the zona pellucida is made with a laser beam, heat propagation could, like the biopsy itself, be deleterious. Our aim was to evaluate the effect of this technique on human in vitro matured oocyte and embryo development. Methods One hunded fifty five retrieved immature oocytes from 75 women, matured in vitro, were distributed in 3 groups: 50 oocytes in a control group, without laser drilling and first polar body biopsy, 52 oocytes in a group with only laser drilling, and 53 oocytes in a group with both laser drilling and first polar body biopsy. Safety was evaluated using four criteria: [1] oocyte lysis rate, [2] oocyte activation rate, [3] oocyte development after calcium ionophore treatment, [4] and embryo chromosome breakage incidence after Tarkowski preparation. Results No difference in the four criteria was observed between the 3 oocyte groups.Conclusions We did not find evidence of deleterious effect of laser drilling and first polar body biopsy on in vitro matured oocytes, according to our criteria.

show abstract

Preimplantation genetic screening for abnormal number of chromosomes (aneuploidies) in in vitro fertilisation or intracytoplasmic sperm injection

Cited by 34 publications

References 15 publications

A review of, and commentary on, the ongoing second clinical introduction of preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) to routine IVF practice

A review of, and commentary on, the ongoing second clinical introduction of preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) to routine IVF practice

Advances and Controversies in Assisted Reproductive Technology

Are zona pellucida laser drilling and polar body biopsy safe for in vitro matured oocytes?

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About