These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [Analysis of clinical outcomes of different embryo stage biopsy in array comparative genomic hybridization based preimplantation genetic diagnosis and screening].
    Author: Shen JD, Wu W, Shu L, Cai LL, Xie JZ, Ma L, Sun XP, Cui YG, Liu JY.
    Journal: Zhonghua Fu Chan Ke Za Zhi; 2017 Dec 25; 52(12):828-834. PubMed ID: 29325267.
    Abstract:
    Objective: To evaluate the efficiency of the application of array comparative genomic hybridization (array-CGH) in preimplantation genetic diagnosis or screening (PGD/PGS), and compare the clinical outcomes of different stage embryo biopsy. Methods: The outcomes of 381 PGD/PGS cycles referred in the First Affiliated Hospital of Nanjing Medical University from July 2011 to August 2015 were retrospectively analyzed. There were 320 PGD cycles with 156 cleavage-stage-biopsy cycles and 164 trophectoderm-biopsy cycles, 61 PGS cycles with 23 cleavage-stage-biopsy cycles and 38 trophectoderm-biopsy cycles. Chromosomal analysis was performed by array-CGH technology combined with whole genome amplification. Single embryo transfer was performed in all transfer cycles. Live birth rate was calculated as the main clinical outcomes. Results: The embryo diagnosis rate of PGD/PGS by array-CGH were 96.9%-99.1%. In PGD biopsy cycles, the live birth rate per embryo transfer cycle and live birth rate per embryo biopsy cycle were 50.0%(58/116) and 37.2%(58/156) in cleavage-stage-biopsy group, 67.5%(85/126) and 51.8%(85/164) in trophectoderm-biopsy group (both P<0.01). In PGS biopsy cycles, the live birth rate per embryo transfer cycle and live birth rate per embryo biopsy cycle were the same as 34.8%(8/23) in cleavage-stage-biopsy group, the same as 42.1%(16/38) in trophectoderm-biopsy group (both P>0.05). Conclusions: High diagnosis rate and idea live birth rate are achieved in PGD/PGS cycles based on array-CGH technology. The live birth rate of trophectoderm-biopsy group is significantly higher than that of cleavage-stage-biopsy group in PGD cycles; the efficiency of trophectoderm-biopsy is better. 目的： 探讨微阵列比较基因组杂交（array-CGH）技术在胚胎植入前遗传学诊断或胚胎植入前遗传学筛查（PGD/PGS）中的应用效果及不同胚胎阶段活检的临床结局的差异。 方法： 回顾性分析2011年7月至2015年8月在南京医科大学第一附属医院进行PGD/PGS治疗的381个周期，其中，PGD 320个周期，采用卵裂期活检156个周期、囊胚期活检164个周期；PGS 61个周期，采用卵裂期活检23个周期、囊胚期活检38个周期。活检标本采用单细胞全基因组扩增结合array-CGH技术行染色体拷贝数分析。所有移植周期均采用单胚胎移植，以活产率作为主要临床结局的评价指标。 结果： array-CGH技术在PGD/PGS中的明确诊断胚胎比例达96.9%~99.1%。PGD活检周期中，卵裂期活检的每移植周期活产率和每活检周期活产率分别为50.0%（58/116）、37.2%（58/156），而囊胚期活检者分别为67.5%（85/126）、51.8%（85/164），分别比较，差异均有统计学意义（P均<0.01）。PGS活检周期中，卵裂期活检的每移植周期活产率和每活检周期活产率均为34.8%（8/23），而囊胚期活检者均为42.1%（16/38），分别比较，差异均无统计学意义（P均>0.05）。 结论： array-CGH技术在PGD/PGS中的应用具有高诊断率，基于array-CGH技术的PGD/PGS可获得理想的临床活产率。在PGD周期中，囊胚期活检比卵裂期活检具有更高的活产率。.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]