The impact of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies (PGT-A) on clinical outcomes in high risk patients

Purpose To investigate whether preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) improves the clinical outcome in patients with advanced maternal age (AMA), recurrent miscarriages (RM), and recurrent implantation failure (RIF). Methods Retrospective cohort study from a single IVF center and a s...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics 2022-06, Vol.39 (6), p.1341-1349
Hauptverfasser: Pantou, Amelia, Mitrakos, Anastasios, Kokkali, Georgia, Petroutsou, Konstantina, Tounta, Georgia, Lazaros, Leandros, Dimopoulos, Alexandros, Sfakianoudis, Konstantinos, Pantos, Konstantinos, Koutsilieris, Michael, Mavrou, Ariadni, Kanavakis, Emmanuel, Tzetis, Maria
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Purpose To investigate whether preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) improves the clinical outcome in patients with advanced maternal age (AMA), recurrent miscarriages (RM), and recurrent implantation failure (RIF). Methods Retrospective cohort study from a single IVF center and a single genetics laboratory. One hundred seventy-six patients undergoing PGT-A were assigned to three groups: an AMA group, an RM group, and a RIF group. Two hundred seventy-nine patients that did not undergo PGT-A were used as controls and subgrouped similarly to the PGT-A cohort. For the PGT-A groups, trophectoderm biopsy was performed and array comparative genomic hybridization was used for PGT-A. Clinical outcomes were compared with the control groups. Results In the RM group, we observed a significant decrease of early pregnancy loss rates in the PGT-A group (18.1% vs 75%) and a significant increase in live birth rate per transfer (50% vs 12.5%) and live birth rate per patient (36% vs 12.5%). In the RIF group, a statistically significant increase in the implantation rate per transfer (69.5% vs 33.3%) as well as the live birth rate per embryo transfer (47.8% vs 19%) was observed. In the AMA group, a statistically significant reduction in biochemical pregnancy loss was observed (3.7% vs 31.5%); however, live birth rates per embryo transfer and per patient were not significantly higher than the control group. Conclusion Our results agree with recently published studies, which suggest caution in the universal application of PGT-A in women with infertility. Instead, a more personalized approach by choosing the right candidates for PGT-A intervention should be followed.
ISSN:1058-0468
1573-7330
DOI:10.1007/s10815-022-02461-9