4.7 Article

Milder ovarian stimulation for in-vitro fertilization reduces aneuploidy in the human preimplantation embryo:: a randomized controlled trial

Journal

HUMAN REPRODUCTION
Volume 22, Issue 4, Pages 980-988

Publisher

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1093/humrep/del484

Keywords

aneuploidy; embryo quality; in-vitro fertilization; ovarian stimulation; preimplantation genetic screening

Ask authors/readers for more resources

To test whether ovarian stimulation for in-vitro fertilization (IVF) affects oocyte quality and thus chromosome segregation behaviour during meiosis and early embryo development, preimplantation genetic screening of embryos was employed in a prospective, randomized controlled trial, comparing two ovarian stimulation regimens. METHODS: Infertile patients under 38 years of age were randomly assigned to undergo a mild stimulation regimen using gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist co-treatment (67 patients), which does not disrupt secondary follicle recruitment, or it conventional high-dose exogenous gonadotrophin regimen and GnRH agonist co-treatment (44 patients). Following IVF, embryos were biopsied at the eight-cell stage and the copy number of 10 chromosomes was analysed in 1 or 2 blastomeres. RESULTS: The study was terminated prematurely, after an unplanned interim analysis (which included 61 % of the planned number of patients) found a lower embryo aneuploidy rate following mild stimulation. Compared with conventional stimulation, significantly fewer oocytes and embryos were obtained following mild stimulation (P < 0.01 and < 0.05, respectively). Consequently, both regimens generated on average a similar number (1.8) of chromosomally normal embryos. Differences in rates of mosaic embryos suggest an effect of ovarian stimulation on mitotic segregation errors. CONCLUSIONS: Future ovarian stimulation strategies should avoid maximizing oocyte yield, but aim at generating a sufficient number of chromosomally normal embryos by reduced interference with ovarian physiology.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available