Journal
MOLECULAR HUMAN REPRODUCTION
Volume 14, Issue 10, Pages 573-579Publisher
OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/molehr/gan052
Keywords
preimplantation genetic diagnosis; preimplantation diagnosis; sensitivity; negative predictive value; embryo morphology
Funding
- Academisch Ziekenhuis Maastricht
- Netherlands Organisation for Scientific Research ZON/NOW
Ask authors/readers for more resources
The aim of this study was to validate the overall preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD)-PCR procedure and to determine the diagnostic value. Genotyped embryos not selected for embryo transfer ( ET) and unsuitable for cryopreservation after PGD were used for confirmatory analysis. The PGD genotyped blastomeres and corresponding embryos were compared, and morphology was scored on Day 4 post fertilization. To establish the validity of the PGD-PCR procedure and the diagnostic value, misdiagnosis rate, false-negative rate and negative predictive value were calculated. Moreover, comparison on the validity was made for the biopsy of one or two blastomeres. For the total embryo group (n = 422), a misdiagnosis rate of 7.1% and a false-negative rate of 3.1% were found. The negative predictive value was 96.1%. Poor morphology Day 4 embryos ( Class 1) were over-represented in the embryo group in which the blastomere genotype was not confirmed by the whole embryo genotype. The misdiagnosis rate of Class 1 embryos was 12.5% and the false-negative rate 17.1%. Exclusion of these embryos resulted in a misdiagnosis rate of 6.1%, a false-negative rate of 0.5% and a negative predictive value of 99.3%. The two blastomere biopsies revealed a significant higher positive predictive value, lowering the misdiagnosis rate, whereas the negative predictive value remained the same. In conclusion, the PGD-PCR procedure is a valid diagnostic method to select unaffected embryos for ET. The misdiagnosis and false-negative rates decrease by rejecting Class 1 embryos for ET. The biopsy of a second blastomere improves the positive predictive value, lowering the misdiagnosis rate.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available