4.4 Article

Polar body based aneuploidy screening is poorly predictive of embryo ploidy and reproductive potential

期刊

JOURNAL OF ASSISTED REPRODUCTION AND GENETICS
卷 31, 期 9, 页码 1221-1226

出版社

SPRINGER/PLENUM PUBLISHERS
DOI: 10.1007/s10815-014-0293-1

关键词

Preimplantation genetic screening (PGS); Polar bodies; Aneuploidy; Blastocyst; SNP array

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Polar body (polar body) biopsy represents one possible solution to performing comprehensive chromosome screening (CCS). This study adds to what is known about the predictive value of polar body based testing for the genetic status of the resulting embryo, but more importantly, provides the first evaluation of the predictive value for actual clinical outcomes after embryo transfer. SNP array was performed on first polar body, second polar body, and either a blastomere or trophectoderm biopsy, or the entire arrested embryo. Concordance of the polar body-based prediction with the observed diagnoses in the embryos was assessed. In addition, the predictive value of the polar body -based diagnosis for the specific clinical outcome of transferred embryos was evaluated through the use of DNA fingerprinting to track individual embryos. There were 459 embryos analyzed from 96 patients with a mean maternal age of 35.3. The polar body-based predictive value for the embryo based diagnosis was 70.3 %. The blastocyst implantation predictive value of a euploid trophectoderm was higher than from euploid polar bodies (51 % versus 40 %). The cleavage stage embryo implantation predictive value of a euploid blastomere was also higher than from euploid polar bodies (31 % versus 22 %). Polar body based aneuploidy screening results were less predictive of actual clinical outcomes than direct embryo assessment and may not be adequate to improve sustained implantation rates. In nearly one-third of cases the polar body based analysis failed to predict the ploidy of the embryo. This imprecision may hinder efforts for polar body based CCS to improve IVF clinical outcomes.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据