Analysis of PGT-M and PGT-SR outcomes at a Canadian fertility clinic.
Adult
Biopsy
Blastocyst
/ pathology
Canada
/ epidemiology
Chromosome Aberrations
/ statistics & numerical data
Embryo Transfer
/ methods
Female
Fertility Clinics
Fertilization in Vitro
/ methods
Genetic Diseases, Inborn
/ diagnosis
Genetic Testing
/ methods
Humans
Inheritance Patterns
Male
Pregnancy
Pregnancy Outcome
/ epidemiology
Pregnancy Rate
Preimplantation Diagnosis
/ methods
Prognosis
Retrospective Studies
Journal
Prenatal diagnosis
ISSN: 1097-0223
Titre abrégé: Prenat Diagn
Pays: England
ID NLM: 8106540
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
09 2019
09 2019
Historique:
received:
26
09
2018
revised:
24
04
2019
accepted:
18
05
2019
pubmed:
7
6
2019
medline:
2
7
2020
entrez:
7
6
2019
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Outcomes from in vitro fertilization (IVF)/intrauterine insemination (ICSI) cycles for patients who underwent preimplantation genetic testing for monogenic/single gene (PGT-M) and structural chromosome rearrangements (PGT-SR) patients were reviewed. Patients pursuing PGT-M and PGT-SR often do not have pre-existing fertility issues and therefore may have uncertain expectations of successful outcomes. Before pursuing PGT-M and PGT-SR, patients require evidence-based counseling regarding the probability of having a healthy child. Retrospective review from a single private IVF clinic of 73 PGT patients, from whom a total of 437 blastocysts were biopsied and screened. Embryo results and pregnancy outcomes were analyzed. Of the 45 PGT-M patients, 64.4% had at least one euploid unaffected embryo. The cumulative pregnancy rate for patients who had embryo transfers in this group was 89.7%, with an ongoing pregnancy or delivery rate of 48.9%. For the 28 PGT-SR patients, 60.7% had at least one euploid unaffected embryo. The cumulative pregnancy rate for patients who had embryo transfers in this group was 87.5%, with an ongoing pregnancy or delivery rate of 42.9%. This information can supplement the existing data in the literature to counsel new patients in terms of realistic expectations of success following PGT-M and PGT-SR.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
866-870Informations de copyright
© 2019 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
Références
Zegers-Hochschild F, Adamson G, Dyer S, et al. The international glossary on infertility and fertility care. Hum Reprod. 2017;32(9):1786-1801.
Sullivan-Pryke C, Dorkas A. Preimplantation genetic screening and preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Obstet Gynecol Clin North Am. 2018;45(1):113-125.
Goldman KN, Nazem T, Berkeley A, Palter S, Grifo JA. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) for monogenic disorders: the value of concurrent aneuploidy screening. J Genet Couns. 2016;25(6):1327-1337.
Ben-Nagi J, Wells D, Doye K, et al. Karyomapping: a single centre's experience from application of methodology to ongoing pregnancy and live-birth rates. Reprod Biomed Online. 2017;35:265-271.
Won SY, Kim H, Lee WS, Kim JW, Shim SH. Pre-implantation genetic diagnosis and pre-implantation genetic screening: two years experience at a single centre. Obstet Gynecol Sci. 2018;61(1):95-101.
Girardet A, Ishmukhametova A, Viart V, et al. Thirteen years' experience of 893 PGD cycles for monogenic disorders in a publicly funded, nationally regulated regional hospital service. Reprod Biomed Online. 2018;36(2):154-163.