PGS-FISH in reproductive medicine and perspective directions for improvement: A systematic review

Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics

Volumn 28, Issue 8, 2011, Pages 747-757

  Zamora, Sandra ^a,b   Clavero, Ana ^a   Gonzalvo, M Carmen ^a   De Dios Luna del Castillo, Juan ^d   Roldán Nofuentes, Jose Antonio ^d   Mozas, Juan ^a   Castilla, Jose Antonio ^a,c  

^a HOSPITAL UNIVERSITARIO VIRGEN DE LAS NIEVES   (Spain)

^b The Centre for Reproduction and Advanced Technology (CREATE) and ISMAAR   (United Kingdom)

^c Sperm Bank CEIFER   (Spain)

^d UNIVERSITY OF GRANADA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Clinical validity; Embryo morphology; Embryo selection; PGS FISH

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ANEUPLOIDY; ARTICLE; CHROMOSOME ABERRATION; DIAGNOSTIC ACCURACY; EMBRYO TRANSFER; FLUORESCENCE IN SITU HYBRIDIZATION; GENETIC PROCEDURES; GENETIC SCREENING; HUMAN; PREIMPLANTATION GENETIC SCREENING; PREVALENCE; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; VALIDITY;

EMBRYO TRANSFER; FERTILIZATION IN VITRO; HUMANS; IN SITU HYBRIDIZATION, FLUORESCENCE; PREIMPLANTATION DIAGNOSIS; REPRODUCTIVE MEDICINE;

EID: 80755139764     PISSN: 10580468     EISSN: 15737330     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10815-011-9578-9     Document Type: Article

References (99)

1. Van Royen E, Mangelschots K, De Neubourg D, Laureys I, Ryckaert G, Gerris J. Calculating the implantation potential of day 3 embryos in women younger than 38 years of age: a new model. Hum Reprod. 2001; 16(2): 326-32. (Pubitemid 32149429)
2. Holte J, Berglund L, Milton K, et al. Construction of an evidencebased integrated morphology cleavage embryo score for implantation potential of embryos scored and transferred on day 2 after oocyte retrieval. Hum Reprod. 2007; 22(2): 548-57. (Pubitemid 46152580)
3. De Placido G, Wilding M, Strina I, et al. High outcome predictability alter IVF using a combined score for zygote and embryomorphology and growth rate. Hum Reprod. 2002; 17(9): 2402-9. (Pubitemid 35021465)
4. Caglar GS, Asimakopoulos B, Nikolettos N, Diedrich K, Al- Hasani S. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidy screening in repeated implantation failure. Reprod Biomed Online. 2005; 10: 381-8. (Pubitemid 40372673)
5. Gianaroli L, Magli MC, Ferraretti AP, et al. The beneficial effects of preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidy support extensive clinical application. Reprod Biomed Online. 2005; 10 (5): 633-40. (Pubitemid 40645545)
6. Donoso P, Devroey P. PGD for aneuploidy screening: an expensive hoax? Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2007; 21 (1): 157-68.
7. Harper J, Sermon K, Geraedts J, et al. What next for preimplantation genetic screening? Hum Reprod. 2008; 23(3): 478-80. (Pubitemid 351651222)
8. Kuliev A, Verlinsky Y. Impact of preimplantation genetic diagnosis for chromosomal disorders on reproductive outcome. Reprod Biomed Online. 2008; 16(1): 9-10. (Pubitemid 351187367)
9. Blockeel C, Schutyser V, De Vos A, et al. Prospectively randomized controlled trial of PGS in IVF/ICSI patients with poor implantation. Reprod Biomed Online. 2008; 17(6): 848-54.
10. Debrock S, Melotte C, Spiessens C, et al. Preimplantation genetic screening for aneuploidy of embryos after in vitro fertilization in women aged at least 35 years: a prospective randomized trial. Fertil Steril. 2010; 93(2): 364-73.
11. Hardarson T, Hanson C, Lundin K, et al. Preimplantation genetic screening in women of advanced maternal age caused a decrease in clinical pregnancy rate: a randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod. 2008; 23: 2806-12.
12. Jansen RP, Bowman MC, de Boer KA, Leigh DA, Lieberman DB, McArthur SJ. What next for preimplantation genetic screening (PGS)? Experience with blastocyst biopsy and testing for aneuploidy. Hum Reprod. 2008; 23(7): 1476-8. (Pubitemid 351809712)
13. Mastenbroek S, Twisk MV, Sikkema-Raddatz B, et al. In vitro fertilization with preimplantation genetic screening. N Engl J Med. 2007; 357(1): 9-17. (Pubitemid 47026730)
14. Mersereau JE, Pergament E, Zhang X, Milad MP. Preimplantation genetic screening to improve in vitro fertilization pregnancy rates: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Fertil Steril. 2008; 90 (4): 1287-9.
15. Meyer LR, Klipstein S, Hazlett WD, Nasta T, Mangan P, Karande VC. A prospective randomized controlled trial of preimplantation genetic screening in the "good prognosis" patient. Fertil Steril. 2009; 91(5): 1731-8.
16. Schoolcraft WB, Katz-Jaffe MG, Stevens J, Rawlins M, Munne S. Preimplantation aneuploidy testing for infertile patients of advanced maternal age: a randomized prospective trial. Fertil Steril. 2009; 92(1): 157-62.
17. Staessen C, Platteau P, Van Assche E, et al. Comparison of blastocyst transfer with or without preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidy screening in couples with advanced maternal age: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod. 2004; 19(12): 2849-58. (Pubitemid 40028958)
18. Staessen C, Verpoest W, Donoso P, et al. Preimplantation genetic screening does not improve delivery rate in women under the age of 36 following single-embryo transfer. Hum Reprod. 2008; 23 (12): 2818-25.
19. Stevens J, Wale P, Surrey ES, Schoolcraft WB. Is aneuploidy screening for patients aged 35 or over beneficial? A prospective randomized trial. Fertil Steril. 2004; 82(2): 249.
20. Cohen J, Grifo JA. Multicentre trial of preimplantation genetic screening reported in the New England Journal of Medicine: an in-depth look at the findings. Reprod Biomed Online. 2007; 15 (4): 365-6. (Pubitemid 47565000)
21. Munné S, Gianaroli L, Tur-Kaspa I, et al. Substandard application of preimplantation genetic screening may interfere with its clinical success. Fertil Steril. 2007; 88(4): 781-4. (Pubitemid 47498398)
22. Colls P, Escudero T, Cekleniak N, Sadowy S, Cohen J, Munné S. Increased efficiency of preimplantation genetic diagnosis for infertility using "no result rescue". Fertil Steril. 2007; 88(1): 53-61. (Pubitemid 47001392)
23. Munné S, Magli C, Bahçe M, et al. Preimplantation diagnosis of the aneuploidies most commonly found in spontaneous abortions and live births: XY, 13, 14, 15, 16, 18, 21, 22. Prenat Diagn. 1998; 18(13): 1459-66. (Pubitemid 29027003)
24. Silber S, Escudero T, Lenahan K, Abdelhadi I, Kilani Z, Munné S. Chromosomal abnormalities in embryos derived from testicular sperm extraction. Fertil Steril. 2003; 79(1): 30-8. (Pubitemid 36071235)
25. Baart EB, Van Opstal D, Los FJ, Fauser BC, Martini E. Fluorescence in situ hybridization analysis of two blastomeres from day 3 frozen-thawed embryos followed by analysis of the remaining embryo on day 5. Hum Reprod. 2004; 19(3): 685-93. (Pubitemid 38344536)
26. Baart EB, Martini E, Van den Berg I, et al. Preimplantation genetic screening reveals a high incidence of aneuploidy and mosaicism in embryos from young women undergoing IVF. Hum Reprod. 2006; 21(1): 223-33. (Pubitemid 41794315)
27. Michiels A, Van Assche E, Liebaers I, Van Steirteghem A, Staessen C. The analysis of one or two blastomeres for PGD using fluorescence in-situ hybridization. Hum Reprod. 2006; 21 (9): 2396-402. (Pubitemid 44530618)
28. DeUgarte CM, Li M, Surrey M, Danzer H, Hill D, DeCherney AH. Accuracy of FISH analysis in predicting chromosomal status in patients undergoing preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Fertil Steril. 2008; 90(4): 1049-54.
29. Greenhalgh T. How to read a paper. Papers that report diagnostic or screening tests. BMJ. 1997; 315(7107): 540-3. (Pubitemid 27359111)
30. Sackett DL, Haynes RB, Guyatt GH, Tugwell P. Clinical epidemiology: A basic science for clinical medicine. Boston: Williams and Wilkins; 1991.
31. Donoso P, Platteau P, Papanikolaou EG, Staessen C, Van Steirteghem A, Devroey P. Does PGD for aneuploidy screening change the selection of embryos derived from testicular sperm extraction in obstructive and non-obstructive azoospermic men? Hum Reprod. 2006; 21(9): 2390-5. (Pubitemid 44530617)
32. Moayeri SE, Allen RB, Brewster WR, Kim MH, Porto M, Werlin LB. Day-3 embryo morphology predicts euploidy among older subjects. Fertil Steril. 2008; 89(1): 118-23.
33. Donoso P, Staessen C, Fauser BC, Devroey P. Current value of preimplantation genetic aneuploidy screening in IVF. Hum Reprod Update. 2007; 13(1): 15-25. (Pubitemid 44932821)
34. Bossuyt PM, Reitsma JB, Bruns DE, et al. Standards for reporting of diagnostic accuracy. The STARD statement for reporting studies of diagnostic accuracy: explanation and elaboration. Clin Chem. 2003; 49(1): 7-17.
35. Jialiang L, Fine JP, Safdar N. Prevalence-dependent diagnostic accuracy measures. Stat Med. 2007; 26(17): 3258-73. (Pubitemid 47039785)
36. Zhou XH, Obuchowski NA, McClish DK. Statistical methods in diagnostic medicine. New York: Wiley; 2002.
37. Fagan TJ. Nomogram for Bayes theorem. N Engl J Med. 1975; 293(5): 257.
38. Greenland S. Quantitative methods in the review of epidemiologic literature. Epidemiol Rev. 1987; 9: 1-30.
39. Higgins JP, Thompson SG. Quantifying heterogeneity in a metaanalysis. Statistics in Medicine. 2001; 21(11): 1539-58.
40. Dersimonian R, Laird N. Meta-analysis in clinical trials. Control Clin Trials. 1986; 7(3): 177-88. (Pubitemid 17189972)
41. Gart JJ, Zweiful JR. On the bias of various estimators of the logit and its variance with applications to quantal bioassay. Biometrika. 1967; 54(1): 181-7.
42. Platteau P, Staessen C, Michiels A, Van Steirteghem A, Liebaers I, Devroey P. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidy screening in women older than 37 years. Fertil Steril. 2005; 84 (2): 319-24. (Pubitemid 41125251)
43. Kahraman S, Bahçe M, Samli H, et al. Healthy births and ongoing pregnancies obtained by preimplantation genetic diagnosis in patients with advanced maternal age and recurrent implantation failure. Hum Reprod. 2000; 15(9): 2003-7.
44. Munné S, Sandalinas M, Escudero T, Márquez C, Cohen J. Chromosome mosaicism in cleavage-stage human embryos: evidence of a maternal age effect. Reprod Biomed Online. 2002; 4(3): 223-32.
45. Preimplantation genetic testing: a Practice Committee Opinion. Fertil Steril. 2007; 88: 1497-504.
46. Wilton L, Voullaire L, Sargeant P, Williamson R, McBain J. Preimplantation aneuploidy screening using comparative genomic hybridization or fluorescence in situ hybridization of embryos from patients with recurrent implantation failure. Fertil Steril. 2003; 80(4): 860-8. (Pubitemid 37230016)
47. Gleicher N, Weghofer A, Barad D. Preimplantation genetic screening: "established" and ready for prime time? Fertil Steril. 2008; 89(4): 780-8.
48. Ruangvutilert P, Delhanty JD, Serhal P, Simopoulou M, Rodeck CH, Harper JC. FISH analysis on day 5 post-insemination of human arrested and blastocyst stage embryos. Prenat Diagn. 2000; 20(7): 552-60. (Pubitemid 30468253)
49. Gonzalez-Merino E, Emiliani S, Vassart G, Van den Bergh M, Vannin AS, Abramowicz M, et al. Incidence of chromosomal mosaicism in human embryos at different developmental stages analyzed by fluorescence in situ hybridization. Genet Test. 2003; 7 (2): 85-95. (Pubitemid 36842196)
50. Coonen E, Derhaag JG, Dumoulin JC, et al. Anaphase lagging mainly explains chromosomal mosaicism in human preimplantation embryos. Human Reprod. 2004; 19(2): 316-24. (Pubitemid 38219999)
51. Bielanska M, Jin S, Bernier M, Tan SL, Ao A. Diploid-aneuploid mosaicism in human embryos cultured to the blastocyst stage. Fertil Steril. 2005; 84(2): 336-42. (Pubitemid 41125254)
52. Daphnis DD, Fragouli E, Economou K, et al. Analysis of the evolution of chromosome abnormalities in human embryos from Day 3 to 5 using CGH and FISH. Mol Hum Reprod. 2008; 14 (2): 117-25. (Pubitemid 351321172)
53. Los FJ, Van Opstal D, Van den Berg C. The development of cytogenetically normal, abnormal and mosaic embryos: a theoretical model. Hum Reprod Update. 2004; 10(1): 79-94. (Pubitemid 38263165)
54. Wilton L, Thornhill A, Traeger-Synodinos J, Sermon KD, Harper JC. The causes of misdiagnosis and adverse outcomes in PGD. Hum Reprod. 2009; 24(5): 1221-8.
55. Cohen J, Wells D, Munné S. Removal of 2 cells from cleavage stage embryos is likely to reduce the efficacy of chromosomal tests that are used to enhance implantation rates. Fertil Steril. 2007; 87(3): 496-503. (Pubitemid 46389618)
56. Goossens V, De Rycke M, De Vos A, et al. Diagnostic efficiency, embryonic development and clinical outcome after the biopsy of one or two blastomeres for preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Hum Reprod. 2008; 23(3): 481-92. (Pubitemid 351651197)
57. Vanneste E, Voet T, Le Caignec C, et al. Chromosome instability is common in human cleavage-stage embryos. Nat Med. 2009; 15 (5): 577-83.
58. Derhaag JG, Coonen E, Bras M, et al. Chromosomally abnormal cells are not selected for the extra-embryonic compartment of the human preimplantation embryo at the blastocyst stage. Hum Reprod. 2003; 18(12): 2565-74. (Pubitemid 37536621)
59. Trussler JL, Pickering SJ, Ogilvie CM. Investigation of chromosomal imbalance in human embryos using comparative genomic hybridization. Reprod Biomed Online. 2004; 8(6): 701-11. (Pubitemid 38744952)
60. Goossens V, Harton G, Moutou C, Traeger-Synodinos J, Van Rij M, Harper JC. ESHRE PGD Consortium data collection IX: cycles from January to December 2006 with pregnancy follow-up to October 2007. Hum Reprod. 2009; 24(8): 1786-810.
61. Knotternus JA, Van Weel C. General introduction: Evaluation of diagnostic procedures. In: Knottnerus JA, editor. The evidence base of clinical diagnosis. London: BMA Books; 2002.
62. Dreesen J, Drüsedau M, Smeets H, et al. Validation of preimplantation genetic diagnosis by PCR analysis: genotype comparison of the blastomere and corresponding embryo, implications for clinical practice. Mol Hum Reprod. 2008; 14 (10): 573-9.
63. Twisk M, Mastenbroek S, Hoek A, et al. No beneficial effect of preimplantation genetic screening in women of advanced maternal age with a high risk for embryonic aneuploidy. Hum Reprod. 2008; 23(12): 2813-7.
64. Summers MC, Foland AD. Quantitative decision-making in preimplantation genetic (aneuploidy) screening (PGS). J Assist Reprod Genet. 2009; 26(9-10): 487-502.
65. Wells D, Delhanty JD. Comprehensive chromosomal analysis of human preimplantation embryos using whole genome amplification and single cell comparative genomic hybridization. Mol Hum Reprod. 2000; 6(11): 1055-62.
66. Sher G, Keskintepe L, Keskintepe M, Maassarani G, Tortoriello D, Brody S. Genetic analysis of human embryos by metaphase comparative genomic hybridization (mCGH) improves efficiency of IVF by increasing embryo implantation rate and reducing multiple pregnancies and spontaneous miscarriages. Fertil Steril. 2009; 92(6): 1886-94.
67. Wells D, Alfarawati S, Fragouli E. Use of comprehensive chromosomal screening for embryo assessment: microarrays and CGH. Mol Hum Reprod. 2008; 14(12): 703-10.
68. Brison DR, Hollywood K, Arnesen R, Goodacre R. Predicting human embryo viability: the road to non-invasive analysis of the secretome using metabolic footprinting. Reprod Biomed Online. 2007; 15(3): 296-302. (Pubitemid 47430369)
69. Katz-Jaffe MG, McReynolds S, Gardner DK, Schoolcraft WB. The role of proteomics in defining the human embryonic secretome. Mol Hum Reprod. 2009; 15(5): 271-7.
70. Lopes AS, Greve T, Callesen H. Quantification of embryo quality by respirometry. Theriogenology. 2007; 67(1): 21-31. (Pubitemid 44854147)
71. Montag M, Schimming T, KösterM, et al. Oocyte zona birefringence intensity is associated with embryonic implantation potential in ICSI cycles. Reprod Biomed Online. 2008; 16(2): 239-44. (Pubitemid 351291971)
72. Scott L, Berntsen J, Davies D, Gundersen J, Hill J, Ramsing N. Symposium: innovative techniques in human embryo viability assessment. Human oocyte respiration-rate measurement-potential to improve oocyte and embryo selection? Reprod Biomed Online. 2008; 17(4): 461-9.
73. Seli E, Sakkas D, Scott R, Kwok SC, Rosendahl SM, Burns DH. Noninvasive metabolomic profiling of embryo culture media using Raman and near-infrared spectroscopy correlates with reproductive potential of embryos in women undergoing in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 2007; 88(5): 1350-7. (Pubitemid 350030104)
74. Kearns WG, Pen R, Graham J, et al. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis and screening. Semin Reprod Med. 2005; 23(4): 336-47. (Pubitemid 41740987)
75. Reis Soares S, Rubio C, Rodrigo L, et al. High frequency of chromosomal abnormalities in embryos obtained from oocyte donation cycles. Fertil Steril. 2003; 80(3): 656-7. (Pubitemid 37102888)
76. Nelson JR, Potter DA, Wilcox JG, Frederick JL, Kolb BA, Behr BR. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis in embryos created from oocytes donation. Fertil Steril. 2005; 84(1): 328-9.
77. Nagy ZP, Chang CC. Current advances in artificial gametes. Reprod Biomed Online. 2005; 11(3): 332-9. (Pubitemid 41269574)
78. Munné S, Ary J, Zouves C, et al. Wide range of chromosome abnormalities in the embryos of young egg donors. Reprod Biomed Online. 2006; 12(3): 340-6.
79. Werlin L, Rodi I, DeCherney A, Marello E, Hill D, Munné S. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis as both a therapeutic and diagnostic tool in assisted reproductive technology. Fertil Steril. 2003; 80(2): 467-8. (Pubitemid 36959815)
80. Gianaroli L, Magli MC, Munné S, Fiorentino A, Montanaro N, Ferraretti AP. Will preimplantation genetic diagnosis assist patients with a poor prognosis to achieve pregnancy? Hum Reprod. 1997; 12(8): 1762-7. (Pubitemid 27406094)
81. Rubio C, Rodrigo L, Pérez-Cano I, et al. FISH screening of aneuploidies in preimplantation embryos to improve IVF outcome. Reprod Biomed Online. 2005; 11(4): 497-506. (Pubitemid 41762072)
82. Vidal F, Giménez C, Rubio C, et al. FISH preimplantation diagnosis of chromosome aneuploidy in recurrent pregnancy wastage. J Assist Reprod Genet. 1998; 15(5): 310-3. (Pubitemid 28223994)
83. Platteau P, Staessen C, Michiels A, Van Steirteghem A, Liebaers I, Devroey P. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidy screening in patients with unexplained recurrent miscarriages. Fertil Steril. 2005; 83(2): 393-7. (Pubitemid 40221794)
84. Munné S, Chen S, Fischer J, et al. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis reduces pregnancy loss in women aged 35 years and older with a history of recurrent miscarriages. Fertil Steril. 2005; 84(2): 331-5. (Pubitemid 41125253)
85. Pellicer A, Rubio C, Vidal F, et al. In vitro fertilization plus preimplantation genetic diagnosis in patients with recurrent miscarriage: an analysis of chromosome abnormalities in human preimplantation embryos. Fertil Steril. 1999; 71(6): 1033-9. (Pubitemid 29252492)
86. Simón C, Rubio C, Vidal F, et al. Increased chromosome abnormalities in human preimplantation embryos after in-vitro fertilization in patients with recurrent miscarriage. Reprod Fertil Dev. 1998; 10(1): 87-92. (Pubitemid 28383844)
87. Garrisi JG, Colls P, Ferry KM, Zheng X, Garrisi MG, Munné S. Effect of infertility, maternal age, and number of previous miscarriages on the outcome of preimplantation genetic diagnosis for idiopathic recurrent pregnancy loss. Fertil Steril. 2009; 92 (1): 288-95.
88. Rubio C, Simón C, Vidal F, et al. Chromosomal abnormalities and embryo development in recurrent miscarriage couples. Hum Reprod. 2003; 18(1): 182-8. (Pubitemid 36138874)
89. Pehlivan T, Rubio C, Rodrigo L, et al. Impact of preimplantation genetic diagnosis on IVF outcome in implantation failure patients. Reprod Biomed Online. 2003; 6(2): 232-7. (Pubitemid 36857155)
90. Platteau P, Staessen C, Michiels A, et al. Comparison of the aneuploidy frequency in embryos derived from testicular sperm extraction in obstructive and nonobstructive azoospermic men. Hum Reprod. 2004; 19(7): 1570-4. (Pubitemid 38997183)
91. Kahraman S, Sertyel S, Findikli N, et al. Effect of PGD on implantation and ongoing pregnancy rates in cases with predominantly macrocephalic spermatozoa. Reprod Biomed Online. 2004; 9(1): 79-85. (Pubitemid 38961720)
92. Baltaci V, Satiroglu H, Kabukçu C, et al. Relationship between embryo quality and aneuploidies. Reprod Biomed Online. 2006; 12(1): 77-82. (Pubitemid 43109361)
93. Magli MC, Gianaroli L, Ferraretti AP, Lappi M, Ruberti A, Farfalli V. Embryo morphology and development are dependent on the chromosomal complement. Fertil Steril. 2007; 87(3): 534-41. (Pubitemid 46385969)
94. Munné S, Chen S, Colls P, et al. Maternal age, morphology, development and chromosome abnormalities in over 6000 cleavagestage embryos. Reprod Biomed Online. 2007; 14(5): 628-34.
95. Rubio C, Rodrigo L, Mercader A, et al. Impact of chromosomal abnormalities on preimplantation embryo development. Prenat Diagn. 2007; 27(8): 748-56. (Pubitemid 47242406)
96. Ziebe S, Lundin K, Loft A, et al. FISH analysis for chromosomes 13, 16, 18, 21, 22, X and Y in all blastomeres of IVF pre-embryos from 144 randomly selected donated human oocytes and impact on pre-embryo morphology. Hum Reprod. 2003; 18(12): 2575-81. (Pubitemid 37536622)
97. Keskintepe L, Sher G, Keskintepe M. Reproductive oocyte/ embryo genetic analysis: comparison between fluorescence in-situ hybridization and comparative genomic hybridization. Reprod Biomed Online. 2007; 15(2): 303-9. (Pubitemid 47430370)
98. Veeck LL. An Atlas of Human Gametes and Conceptuses. London: Parthenon; 1998.
99. Alikani M, Cohen J, Tomkin G, et al. Human embryo fragmentation in vitro and its implications for pregnancy and implantation. Fertil Steril. 1999; 71: 836-42. (Pubitemid 29206907)