Clinical management of in vitro fertilization with preimplantation genetic diagnosis

Seminars in Reproductive Medicine

Volumn 30, Issue 4, 2012, Pages 309-321

  Tur Kaspa, Ilan ^a,b,c  

^a Institute for Human Reproduction (IHR)   (United States)

^b REPRODUCTIVE GENETICS INSTITUTE   (United States)

^c UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO   (United States)

Author keywords

assisted reproductive technology (ART); hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT); HLA typing; IVF outcome; nondisclosure PGD; preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD); preimplantation genetic screening (PGS); single embryo transfer (SET)

Indexed keywords

ADVERSE OUTCOME; ANEUPLOIDY; ARTICLE; BLASTOMERE; EMBRYO DEVELOPMENT; EMBRYO TRANSFER; FEMALE INFERTILITY; FERTILIZATION IN VITRO; GENE MUTATION; GENETIC SCREENING; HLA MATCHING; HUMAN; MENTAL DEVELOPMENT; MULTIPLE PREGNANCY; OOCYTE RETRIEVAL; OVULATION INDUCTION; POLAR BODY; PREGNANCY OUTCOME; PREGNANCY RATE; PREIMPLANTATION GENETIC DIAGNOSIS; PRENATAL DIAGNOSIS; PSYCHOMOTOR DEVELOPMENT; STILLBIRTH; UNITED STATES;

EMBRYO TRANSFER; FEMALE; FERTILIZATION IN VITRO; HEMATOPOIETIC STEM CELL TRANSPLANTATION; HLA ANTIGENS; HUMANS; OVULATION INDUCTION; PREGNANCY; PREIMPLANTATION DIAGNOSIS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 84862515367     PISSN: 15268004     EISSN: 15264564     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1055/s-0032-1313910     Document Type: Article

References (152)

1. American Medical Association Prenatal Genetic Screening. CEJA Report D-I-92. Available at: www.ama-assn.org/resources/doc/code-medical-ethics/211a. pdf. Accessed July 14, 2011
2. Practice Committee of Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology; Practice Committee of American Society for Reproductive Medicine Preimplantation genetic testing: a Practice Committee opinion. Fertil Steril: 2008; 90 5, Suppl S136 S143
3. Soini S, Ibarreta D, Anastasiadou V., et al. ESHG; ESHRE The interface between assisted reproductive technologies and genetics: technical, social, ethical and legal issues. Eur J Hum Genet: 2006; 14 5 588 645
4. Handyside AH. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis after 20 years. Reprod Biomed Online: 2010; 21 3 280 282
5. Tur-Kaspa I, Aljadeff G, Rechitsky S, Grotjan HE, Verlinsky Y. PGD for all cystic fibrosis carrier couples: novel strategy for preventive medicine and cost analysis. Reprod Biomed Online: 2010; 21 2 186 195
6. Verlinsky Y, Tur-Kaspa I, Cieslak J., et al. Preimplantation testing for chromosomal disorders improves reproductive outcome of poor-prognosis patients. Reprod Biomed Online: 2005; 11 2 219 225 (Pubitemid 41086948)
7. Otani T, Roche M, Mizuike M, Colls P, Escudero T, Munné S. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis significantly improves the pregnancy outcome of translocation carriers with a history of recurrent miscarriage and unsuccessful pregnancies. Reprod Biomed Online: 2006; 13 6 869 874 (Pubitemid 46019339)
8. Fischer J, Colls P, Escudero T, Munné S. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) improves pregnancy outcome for translocation carriers with a history of recurrent losses. Fertil Steril: 2010; 94 1 283 289
9. Keymolen K, Staessen C, Verpoest W., et al. A proposal for reproductive counselling in carriers of Robertsonian translocations: 10 years of experience with preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Hum Reprod: 2009; 24 9 2365 2371
10. Fiorentino F, Kokkali G, Biricik A., et al. Polymerase chain reaction-based detection of chromosomal imbalances on embryos: the evolution of preimplantation genetic diagnosis for chromosomal translocations. Fertil Steril: 2010; 94 6 2001 2011, 2011, e1-e6
11. Harton G, Braude P, Lashwood A., et al. European Society for Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) PGD Consortium. ESHRE PGD consortium best practice guidelines for organization of a PGD centre for PGD/preimplantation genetic screening. Hum Reprod: 2011; 26 1 14 24
12. Audibert F, Wilson RD, Allen V., et al. Genetics Committee. Preimplantation genetic testing. J Obstet Gynaecol Can: 2009; 31 8 761 775
13. Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis International Society (PGDIS). Guidelines for good practice in PGD: programme requirements and laboratory quality assurance. Reprod Biomed Online: 2008; 16 1 134 147
14. Musters AM, Twisk M, Leschot NJ., et al. Perspectives of couples with high risk of transmitting genetic disorders. Fertil Steril: 2010; 94 4 1239 1243
15. Verlinsky Y, Ginsberg N, Lifchez A, Valle J, Moise J, Strom CM. Analysis of the first polar body: preconception genetic diagnosis. Hum Reprod: 1990; 5 7 826 829 (Pubitemid 20357674)
16. Handyside AH, Kontogianni EH, Hardy K, Winston RM. Pregnancies from biopsied human preimplantation embryos sexed by Y-specific DNA amplification. Nature: 1990; 344 6268 768 770
17. Twisk M, Haadsma ML, van der Veen F., et al. Preimplantation genetic screening as an alternative to prenatal testing for Down syndrome: preferences of women undergoing in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection treatment. Fertil Steril: 2007; 88 4 804 810 (Pubitemid 47498367)
18. Wilton L. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis and chromosome analysis of blastomeres using comparative genomic hybridization. Hum Reprod Update: 2005; 11 1 33 41 (Pubitemid 40201974)
19. Shahine LK, Cedars MI. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis does not increase pregnancy rates in patients at risk for aneuploidy. Fertil Steril: 2006; 85 1 51 56 (Pubitemid 43063422)
20. Anderson RA, Pickering S. The current status of preimplantation genetic screening: British Fertility Society Policy and Practice Guidelines. Hum Fertil (Camb): 2008; 11 2 71 75 (Pubitemid 351935233)
21. Gleicher N, Weghofer A, Barad D. Preimplantation genetic screening: "establishedo" and ready for prime time? Fertil Steril: 2008; 89 4 780 788
22. Basille C, Frydman R, El Aly A., et al. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis: state of the art. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol: 2009; 145 1 9 13
23. Harper J, Coonen E, De Rycke M., et al. What next for preimplantation genetic screening (PGS)? A position statement from the ESHRE PGD Consortium Steering Committee. Hum Reprod: 2010; 25 4 821 823
24. Harper JC, Harton G. The use of arrays in preimplantation genetic diagnosis and screening. Fertil Steril: 2010; 94 4 1173 1177
25. Munné S, Wells D, Cohen J. Technology requirements for preimplantation genetic diagnosis to improve assisted reproduction outcomes. Fertil Steril: 2010; 94 2 408 430
26. Schoolcraft WB, Fragouli E, Stevens J, Munné S, Katz-Jaffe MG, Wells D. Clinical application of comprehensive chromosomal screening at the blastocyst stage. Fertil Steril: 2010; 94 5 1700 1706
27. Schoolcraft WB, Treff NR, Stevens KF, Ferry K, Katz-Jaffe M, Scott RT Jr. Live birth outcome with trophectoderm biopsy, blastocyst vitrification, and single-nucleotide polymorphism microarray-based comprehensive. Fertil Steril: 2011; 96 3 638 640
28. Scott RT Jr, Tao X, Taylor D, Ferry KM, Treff NR. A prospective randomized controlled trial demonstrating significantly increased clinical pregnancy rates following 24 chromosome aneuploidy screening: biopsy and analysis on day 5 with fresh transfer. Fertil Steril: 2010; 94 Suppl S2
29. Hershberger PE, Schoenfeld C, Tur-Kaspa I. Unraveling preimplantation genetic diagnosis for couples at high-genetic-risk: applications, procedures, and implications for nurses at the front line of care. Nurs Womens Health: 2011; 15 36 45
30. 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)
31. 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 3 481 492 (Pubitemid 351651197)
32. De Vos A, Staessen C, De Rycke M., et al. Impact of cleavage-stage embryo biopsy in view of PGD on human blastocyst implantation: a prospective cohort of single embryo transfers. Hum Reprod: 2009; 24 12 2988 2996
33. 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 4 781 784 (Pubitemid 47498398)
34. Mastenbroek S, Twisk M, van Echten-Arends J., et al. In vitro fertilization with preimplantation genetic screening. N Engl J Med: 2007; 357 1 9 17 (Pubitemid 47026730)
35. 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 4 365 366 (Pubitemid 47565000)
36. Magli MC, Gianaroli L, Ferraretti AP, Toschi M, Esposito F, Fasolino MC. The combination of polar body and embryo biopsy does not affect embryo viability. Hum Reprod: 2004; 19 5 1163 1169 (Pubitemid 38618499)
37. Cieslak-Janzen J, Tur-Kaspa I, Ilkevitch Y, Bernal A, Morris R, Verlinsky Y. Multiple micromanipulations for PGD does not affect embryo development to blastocyst. Fertil Steril: 2006; 85 1826 1829 (Pubitemid 43816421)
38. Verpoest W, Van Landuyt L, Desmyttere S, Cremers A, Devroey P, Liebaers I. The incidence of monozygotic twinning following PGD is not increased. Hum Reprod: 2009; 24 11 2945 2950
39. Harton GL, Magli MC, Lundin K, Montag M, Lemmen J, Harper JC.; European Society for Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) PGD Consortium/Embryology Special Interest Group ESHRE PGD Consortium/Embryology Special Interest Groupbest practice guidelines for polar body and embryo biopsy for preimplantation genetic diagnosis/screening (PGD/PGS). Hum Reprod: 2011; 26 1 41 46
40. Cho YJ, Kim JY, Song IO., et al. Does blastomere biopsy in preimplantation genetic diagnosis affect early serum β-hCG levels? Clin Exp Reprod Med: 2011; 38 1 31 36
41. Marshall SL, Liu M, Talebian S, Salas J, Keegan D, Grifo J. Day 28 β-hCG values of viable pregnancies from biopsied embryos for preimplantation genetic diagnosis and screening (PGDS) are lower than viable pregnancies from non-biopsied embryos. Fertil Steril: 2008; 90 Suppl S124
42. Tur-Kaspa I, Confino E, Dudkiewicz AB, Myers SA, Friberg J, Gleicher N. Ovarian stimulation protocol for in vitro fertilization with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist widens the implantation window. Fertil Steril: 1990; 53 5 859 864 (Pubitemid 20180476)
43. Harper JC, de Die-Smulders C, Goossens V., et al. ESHRE PGD consortium data collection VII: cycles from January to December 2004 with pregnancy follow-up to October 2005. Hum Reprod: 2008; 23 4 741 755 (Pubitemid 351651188)
44. Harper JC, Coonen E, De Rycke M., et al. ESHRE PGD Consortium data collection X: cycles from January to December 2007 with pregnancy follow-up to October 2008. Hum Reprod: 2010; 25 11 2685 2707
45. Grifo J, Talebian S, Keegan D, Krey L, Adler A, Berkeley A. Ten-year experience with preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) at the New York University School of Medicine Fertility Center. Fertil Steril: 2007; 88 4 978 981 (Pubitemid 47498356)
46. Tur-Kaspa I, Bernal A, Tkachenko N, Pawlovska J, Rechitsky S, Verlinsky Y. To PGD or not to PGD: is there a magic number of oocytes to start with? Fertil Steril: 2007; 88 01 S231 S232
47. Tur-Kaspa I. Clinical outcome of PGD. Reprod Biomed Online: 2008; 16 03 S13
48. Donoso P, Verpoest W, Papanikolaou EG., et al. Single embryo transfer in preimplantation genetic diagnosis cycles for women <36 years does not reduce delivery rate. Hum Reprod: 2007; 22 4 1021 1025
49. Verpoest W, Haentjens P, De Rycke M., et al. Cumulative reproductive outcome after preimplantation genetic diagnosis: a report on 1498 couples. Hum Reprod: 2009; 24 11 2951 2959
50. Grace J, El-Toukhy T, Scriven P., et al. Three hundred and thirty cycles of preimplantation genetic diagnosis for serious genetic disease: clinical considerations affecting outcome. BJOG: 2006; 113 12 1393 1401 (Pubitemid 44736684)
51. Feyereisen E, Steffann J, Romana S., et al. Five years' experience of preimplantation genetic diagnosis in the Parisian Center: outcome of the first 441 started cycles. Fertil Steril: 2007; 87 1 60 73 (Pubitemid 46013865)
52. Owen CM, Segars JH Jr. Imprinting disorders and assisted reproductive technology. Semin Reprod Med: 2009; 27 5 417 428
53. Goossens V, Harton G, Moutou C., et al. European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology PGD Consortium. ESHRE PGD Consortium data collection VIII: cycles from January to December 2005 with pregnancy follow-up to October 2006. Hum Reprod: 2008; 23 12 2629 2645
54. Simpson JL. Children born after preimplantation genetic diagnosis show no increase in congenital anomalies. Hum Reprod: 2010; 25 1 6 8
55. Strom CM, Levin R, Strom S, Masciangelo C, Kuliev A, Verlinsky Y. Neonatal outcome of preimplantation genetic diagnosis by polar body removal: the first 109 infants. Pediatrics: 2000; 106 4 650 653
56. Tur-Kaspa I, Horwitz A, Ginsberg N, Cieslak J, Rechitsky S, Verlinsky Y. Clinical outcome of PGD. Fertil Steril: 2005; 84 01 S99
57. Banerjee I, Shevlin M, Taranissi M., et al. Health of children conceived after preimplantation genetic diagnosis: a preliminary outcome study. Reprod Biomed Online: 2008; 16 3 376 381 (Pubitemid 351419457)
58. Nekkebroeck J, Bonduelle M, Desmyttere S, Van den Broeck W, Ponjaert-Kristoffersen I. Mental and psychomotor development of 2-year-old children born after preimplantation genetic diagnosis/screening. Hum Reprod: 2008; 23 7 1560 1566 (Pubitemid 351809696)
59. Nekkebroeck J, Bonduelle M, Desmyttere S, Van den Broeck W, Ponjaert-Kristoffersen I. Socio-emotional and language development of 2-year-old children born after PGD/PGS, and parental well-being. Hum Reprod: 2008; 23 8 1849 1857 (Pubitemid 352020010)
60. Liebaers I, Desmyttere S, Verpoest W., et al. Report on a consecutive series of 581 children born after blastomere biopsy for preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Hum Reprod: 2010; 25 1 275 282
61. Rimm AA, Katayama AC, Katayama KP. A meta-analysis of the impact of IVF and ICSI on major malformations after adjusting for the effect of subfertility. J Assist Reprod Genet: 2011; 28 8 699 705
62. Desmyttere S, De Schepper J, Nekkebroeck J., et al. Two-year auxological and medical outcome of singletons born after embryo biopsy applied in preimplantation genetic diagnosis or preimplantation genetic screening. Hum Reprod: 2009; 24 2 470 476
63. Middelburg KJ, van der Heide M, Houtzager B., et al. PGS Follow-up Study Group. Mental, psychomotor, neurologic, and behavioral outcomes of 2-year-old children born after preimplantation genetic screening: follow-up of a randomized controlled trial. Fertil Steril: 2011; 96 1 165 169
64. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, American Society for Reproductive Medicine, Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology 2006 Assisted Reproductive Technology Success Rates: National Summary and Fertility Clinic Reports, Appendix C. Atlanta, GA U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: 2008;. Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/ART/ART2006/508PDF/2006ART.pdf. Accessed July 18, 2011
65. Tur-Kaspa I. The management of poor responder for IVF with PGD. Reprod Biomed Online: 2010; 20 01 S10
66. Garrisi J, Chen SH, Cekleniak NA, Garrisi MG, Cohen J, Munné S. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) is indicated for recurrent miscarriage even in cycles producing five or fewer embryos. Fertil Steril: 2006; 86 Suppl S58 S59
67. Verpoest W, Seneca S, De Rademaeker M., et al. The reproductive outcome of female patients with myotonic dystrophy type 1 (DM1) undergoing PGD is not affected by the size of the expanded CTG repeat tract. J Assist Reprod Genet: 2010; 27 6 327 333
68. Figueira RdeC, Braga DP, Setti AS, Iaconelli A Jr, Borges E Jr. Morphological nuclear integrity of sperm cells is associated with preimplantation genetic aneuploidy screening cycle outcomes. Fertil Steril: 2011; 95 3 990 993
69. Tur-Kaspa I. Optimizing ovarian stimulation for IVF with PGD. Reprod Biomed Online: 2008; 16 Suppl S22 S23
70. Nardo LG, Fleming R, Howles CM., et al. Conventional ovarian stimulation no longer exists: welcome to the age of individualized ovarian stimulation. Reprod Biomed Online: 2011; 23 2 141 148
71. Yates AP, Rustamov O, Roberts SA., et al. Anti-Mullerian hormone-tailored stimulation protocols improve outcomes whilst reducing adverse effects and costs of IVF. Hum Reprod: 2012; 27 20 629
72. Tur-Kaspa I, Gal M, Hartman M, Hartman J, Hartman A. A prospective evaluation of uterine abnormalities by saline infusion sonohysterography in 1,009 women with infertility or abnormal uterine bleeding. Fertil Steril: 2006; 86 6 1731 1735
73. Fatemi HM, Kasius JC, Timmermans A., et al. Prevalence of unsuspected uterine cavity abnormalities diagnosed by office hysteroscopy prior to in vitro fertilization. Hum Reprod: 2010; 25 8 1959 1965
74. Karayalcin R, Ozcan S, Moraloglu O, Ozyer S, Mollamahmutoglu L, Batoglu S. Results of 2500 office-based diagnostic hysteroscopies before IVF. Reprod Biomed Online: 2010; 20 5 689 693
75. Summers MC, Foland AD. Quantitative decision-making in preimplantation genetic (aneuploidy) screening (PGS). J Assist Reprod Genet: 2009; 26 9-10 487 502
76. Sunkara SK, Rittenberg V, Raine-Fenning N, Bhattacharya S, Zamora J, Coomarasamy A. Association between the number of eggs and live birth in IVF treatment: an analysis of 400, 135 treatment cycles. Hum Reprod: 2011; 26 7 1768 1774
77. van der Gaasta MH, Eijkemansb MJC, van der Netb JB., et al. Optimum number of oocytes for a successful first IVF treatment cycle. Reprod BioMed Online: 2006; 13 476 480
78. Revelli A, Casano S, Salvagno F, Delle Piane L. Milder is better? Advantages and disadvantages of "mildo" ovarian stimulation for human in vitro fertilization. Reprod Biol Endocrinol: 2011; 9 25
79. Vandervorst M, Liebaers I, Sermon K., et al. Successful preimplantation genetic diagnosis is related to the number of available cumulus-oocyte complexes. Hum Reprod: 1998; 13 11 3169 3176 (Pubitemid 28521871)
80. Unal S, Yelke H, Altin G, Candan ZN, Kumtepe Y, Kahraman S. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) results with respect to number of MII oocyte. Fertil Steril: 2009; 92 Suppl S202
81. Devroey P, Aboulghar M, Garcia-Velasco J., et al. Improving the patient's experience of IVF/ICSI: a proposal for an ovarian stimulation protocol with GnRH antagonist co-treatment. Hum Reprod: 2009; 24 4 764 774
82. Tur-Kaspa I, Ezcurra D. GnRH antagonist, cetrorelix, for pituitary suppression in modern, patient-friendly assisted reproductive technology. Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol: 2009; 5 10 1323 1336
83. Munné S, Magli C, Adler A., et al. Treatment-related chromosome abnormalities in human embryos. Hum Reprod: 1997; 12 4 780 784 (Pubitemid 27223047)
84. Elbling L, Colot M. Abnormal development and transport and increased sister-chromatid exchange in preimplantation embryos following superovulation in mice. Mutat Res: 1985; 147 4 189 195 (Pubitemid 15040961)
85. Roberts R, Iatropoulou A, Ciantar D., et al. Follicle-stimulating hormone affects metaphase I chromosome alignment and increases aneuploidy in mouse oocytes matured in vitro. Biol Reprod: 2005; 72 1 107 118 (Pubitemid 40013760)
86. Weghofer A, Munné S, Brannath W., et al. The impact of LH-containing gonadotropin stimulation on euploidy rates in preimplantation embryos: antagonist cycles. Fertil Steril: 2009; 92 3 937 942
87. Baart EB, Martini E, Eijkemans MJ., et al. Milder ovarian stimulation for in-vitro fertilization reduces aneuploidy in the human preimplantation embryo: a randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod: 2007; 22 4 980 988
88. Tur-Kaspa I, Beneral A, Tkachenko A, Kuliev A, Zlatopolsky A, Verlinsky Y. Does ovarian stimulation protocol for IVF and number of oocytes retrieved affect embryos' aneuploidy rate? Fertil Steril: 2008; 90 Suppl S382
89. Kyrou D, Verpoest W, Staessen C., et al. No relationship between the type of pituitary suppression for IVF and chromosomal abnormality rates of blastomeres: an observational study. Fertil Steril: 2011; 95 2 563 567
90. Gianaroli L, Magli MC, Cavallini G., et al. Predicting aneuploidy in human oocytes: key factors which affect the meiotic process. Hum Reprod: 2010; 25 9 2374 2386
91. Weghofer A, Barad D, Li J, Gleicher N. Aneuploidy rates in embryos from women with prematurely declining ovarian function: a pilot study. Fertil Steril: 2007; 88 1 90 94 (Pubitemid 47001381)
92. Setti AS, de Almeida Ferreira Braga DP, de Cássia Savio Figueira R, de Castro Azevedo M, Iaconelli A Jr, Borges E Jr. Are poor responders patients at higher risk for producing aneuploid embryos in vitro? J Assist Reprod Genet: 2011; 28 5 399 404
93. Kyrou D, Verpoest W, Van der Elst J, Haentjens P, Devroey P, Liebaers I. The influence of age on reproductive outcome in preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD). Fertil Steril: 2008; 90 S305
94. Massie JA, Shahine LK, Milki AA, Westphal LM, Lathi RB. Ovarian stimulation and the risk of aneuploid conceptions. Fertil Steril: 2011; 95 3 970 972
95. Martin RH. Meiotic errors in human oogenesis and spermatogenesis. Reprod Biomed Online: 2008; 16 4 523 531 (Pubitemid 351566167)
96. 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 3 340 346
97. Verpoest W, Fauser BC, Papanikolaou E., et al. Chromosomal aneuploidy in embryos conceived with unstimulated cycle IVF. Hum Reprod: 2008; 23 10 2369 2371
98. Kuliev A, Rechitsky S, Laziuk K, Verlinsky O, Tur-Kaspa I, Verlinsky Y. Pre-embryonic diagnosis for Sandhoff disease. Reprod Biomed Online: 2006; 12 3 328 333
99. Altarescu G, Renbaum P, Brooks P B., et al. Successful polar body-based preimplantation genetic diagnosis for achondroplasia. Reprod Biomed Online: 2008; 16 2 276 282 (Pubitemid 351291977)
100. Lie Fong S, Baart EB, Martini E., et al. Anti-Müllerian hormone: a marker for oocyte quantity, oocyte quality and embryo quality? Reprod Biomed Online: 2008; 16 5 664 670 (Pubitemid 351721736)
101. Platteau P, Sermon K, Seneca S, Van Steirteghem A, Devroey P, Liebaers I. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis for fragile Xa syndrome: difficult but not impossible. Hum Reprod: 2002; 17 11 2807 2812 (Pubitemid 35350894)
102. Feyereisen E, Amar A, Kerbrat V., et al. Myotonic dystrophy: does it affect ovarian follicular status and responsiveness to controlled ovarian stimulation? Hum Reprod: 2006; 21 1 175 182 (Pubitemid 41794308)
103. Sagel J, Distiller LA, Morley JE, Isaacs H, Kay G, Van Der Walt A. Myotonia dystrophica: studies on gonadal function using luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LRH). J Clin Endocrinol Metab: 1975; 40 6 1110 1113
104. Harper P. Myotonic dystrophy and other autosomal muscular dystrophies. In: Scriver CR, Beaudet AL, Sly WS, Valle D. eds. The Metabolic and Molecular Basis of Inherited Disease. New York, NY McGraw-Hill: 1995; 4227 4253
105. Sahu B, Ozturk O, Deo N, Fordham K, Ranierri M, Serhal P. Response to controlled ovarian stimulation and oocyte quality in women with myotonic dystrophy type I. J Assist Reprod Genet: 2008; 25 1 1 5
106. Verpoest W, De Rademaeker M, Sermon K., et al. Real and expected delivery rates of patients with myotonic dystrophy undergoing intracytoplasmic sperm injection and preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Hum Reprod: 2008; 23 7 1654 1660 (Pubitemid 351809703)
107. Verpoest W, Seneca S, De Rademaeker M., et al. The reproductive outcome of female patients with myotonic dystrophy type 1 (DM1) undergoing PGD is not affected by the size of the expanded CTG repeat tract. J Assist Reprod Genet: 2010; 27 6 327 333
108. Chen SH, Escudero T, Cekleniak NA, Sable DB, Garrisi MG, Munné S. Patterns of ovarian response to gonadotropin stimulation in female carriers of balanced translocation. Fertil Steril: 2005; 83 5 1504 1509 (Pubitemid 40615827)
109. Benner A, Pen R, Siegel A, Kittai A, Kearns WG. Do female balanced translocations influence ovarian response pattern to controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) in preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD)? Fertil Steril: 2009; 92 Suppl S200
110. Gelbaya TA, Tsoumpou I, Nardo LG. The likelihood of live birth and multiple birth after single versus double embryo transfer at the cleavage stage: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril: 2010; 94 3 936 945
111. McLernon DJ, Harrild K, Bergh C., et al. Clinical effectiveness of elective single versus double embryo transfer: meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomised trials. BMJ: 2010; 341 c6945
112. Tur-Kaspa I, Cieslak J, Ilkevitch Y, Bernal A, Rechitsky S, Verlinsky Y. The fate of frozen/thawed embryos derived from cycles with preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Fertil Steril: 2004; 82 02 S254 S255
113. McArthur SJ, Leigh D, Marshall JT, de Boer KA, Jansen RP. Pregnancies and live births after trophectoderm biopsy and preimplantation genetic testing of human blastocysts. Fertil Steril: 2005; 84 6 1628 1636 (Pubitemid 41785655)
114. Escribá MJ, Zulategui JF, Galán A, Mercader A, Remohí J, de los Santos MJ. Vitrification of preimplantation genetically diagnosed human blastocysts and its contribution to the cumulative ongoing pregnancy rate per cycle by using a closed device. Fertil Steril: 2008; 89 4 840 846 (Pubitemid 351491227)
115. El-Toukhy T, Kamal A, Wharf E., et al. Reduction of the multiple pregnancy rate in a preimplantation genetic diagnosis programme after introduction of single blastocyst transfer and cryopreservation of blastocysts biopsied on day 3. Hum Reprod: 2009; 24 10 2642 2648
116. Van Landuyt L, Verpoest W, Verheyen G., et al. Closed blastocyst vitrification of biopsied embryos: evaluation of 100 consecutive warming cycles. Hum Reprod: 2011; 26 2 316 322
117. Kahraman S, Candan ZN. Outcomes of vitrified-warmed day-4 embryos after day-3 cleavage-stage biopsy. Reprod Biomed Online: 2010; 21 5 636 641
118. de Boer KA, Catt JW, Jansen RP, Leigh D, McArthur S. Moving to blastocyst biopsy for preimplantation genetic diagnosis and single embryo transfer at Sydney IVF. Fertil Steril: 2004; 82 2 295 298 (Pubitemid 39092022)
119. Baruch S, Kaufman D, Hudson KL. Genetic testing of embryos: practices and perspectives of US in vitro fertilization clinics. Fertil Steril: 2008; 89 5 1053 1058 (Pubitemid 351671741)
120. Hammoud I, Molina-Gomes D, Albert M., et al. Are zona pellucida laser drilling and polar body biopsy safe for in vitro matured oocytes? J Assist Reprod Genet: 2010; 27 7 423 427
121. Spits C, Sermon K. PGD for monogenic disorders: aspects of molecular biology. Prenat Diagn: 2009; 29 1 50 56
122. Kuliev A, Verlinsky Y. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis: technological advances to improve accuracy and range of applications. Reprod Biomed Online: 2008; 16 4 532 538 (Pubitemid 351566168)
123. Kuliev A, Rechitsky S. Polar body based preimplantation genetic diagnosis for Mendelian disorders. Mol Hum Reprod: 2011;; In press
124. Bellavia M, Von Der Weid N, Peddes C., et al. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) for HLA typing: bases for setting up an open international collaboration when PGD is not available. Fertil Steril: 2010; 94 3 1129 1131
125. Braude PR, De Wert GM, Evers-Kiebooms G, Pettigrew RA, Geraedts JP. Non-disclosure preimplantation genetic diagnosis for Huntington's disease: practical and ethical dilemmas. Prenat Diagn: 1998; 18 13 1422 1426 (Pubitemid 29026999)
126. Sermon K, De Rijcke M, Lissens W., et al. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis for Huntington's disease with exclusion testing. Eur J Hum Genet: 2002; 10 10 591 598 (Pubitemid 35277291)
127. Tur-Kaspa I, Najeemuddin R. Nondisclosure PGD for late onset autosomal dominant diseases: revised ethical considerations. Reprod Biomed Online: 2010; 20 01 S38 S39
128. Verlinsky Y, Rechitsky S, Schoolcraft W, Strom C, Kuliev A. Preimplantation diagnosis for Fanconi anemia combined with HLA matching. JAMA: 2001; 285 24 3130 3133 (Pubitemid 32578210)
129. Samuel GN, Strong KA, Kerridge I, Jordens CF, Ankeny RA, Shaw PJ. Establishing the role of pre-implantation genetic diagnosis with human leucocyte antigen typing: what place do "saviour siblingso" have in paediatric transplantation? Arch Dis Child: 2009; 94 4 317 320
130. American Academy of Pediatrics. Committee on Bioethics. Children as hematopoietic stem cell donors. Pediatrics: 2010; 125 2 392 404
131. National Marrow Donor Program. Outcomes and trends. Available at: http://www.marrow.org/PHYSICIAN/Outcomes-Data/index.html#sources. Accessed February 2010
132. Szabolcs P, Cavazzana-Calvo M, Fischer A, Veys P. Bone marrow transplantation for primary immunodeficiency diseases. Pediatr Clin North Am: 2010; 57 1 207 237
133. Rechitsky S, Kuliev A, Tur-Kaspa I, Morris R, Verlinsky Y. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis with HLA matching. Reprod Biomed Online: 2004; 9 2 210 221 (Pubitemid 39157487)
134. Fiorentino F, Biricik A, Karadayi H., et al. Development and clinical application of a strategy for preimplantation genetic diagnosis of single gene disorders combined with HLA matching. Mol Hum Reprod: 2004; 10 6 445 460 (Pubitemid 38714377)
135. Kuliev A, Rechitsky S, Verlinsky O., et al. Preimplantation diagnosis and HLA typing for haemoglobin disorders. Reprod Biomed Online: 2005; 11 3 362 370 (Pubitemid 41269580)
136. Rechitsky S, Kuliev A, Sharapova T., et al. Preimplantation HLA typing with aneuploidy testing. Reprod Biomed Online: 2006; 12 1 89 100 (Pubitemid 43109363)
137. Van De Velde H, De Rycke M, De Man C., et al. The experience of two European preimplantation genetic diagnosis centres on human leukocyte antigen typing. Hum Reprod: 2009; 24 3 732 740
138. Kahraman S, Beyazyurek C, Ekmekci CG. Seven years of experience of preimplantation HLA typing: a clinical overview of 327 cycles. Reprod Biomed Online: 2011; 23 3 363 371
139. Tur-Kaspa I, Najeemuddin R. When to offer PGD for HLA typing to parents of a sick child: suggested clinical guidelines. Reprod Biomed Online: 2010; 20 01 S39
140. Offit K, Sagi M, Hurley K. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis for cancer syndromes: a new challenge for preventive medicine. JAMA: 2006; 296 22 2727 2730 (Pubitemid 44917550)
141. Simpson JL. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis at 20 years. Prenat Diagn: 2010; 30 7 682 695
142. Cohen J, Garrisi M, Zouves C., et al. Results of PGD for chromosome abnormalities in 4079 cycles. Fertil Steril: 2005; 84 01 S48
143. Kearns WG, Pen R, Graham J., et al. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis and screening. Semin Reprod Med: 2005; 23 4 336 347 (Pubitemid 41740987)
144. Thornhill AR, deDie-Smulders CE, Geraedts JP., et al. ESHRE PGD Consortium. ESHRE PGD Consortium 'Best practice guidelines for clinical preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) and preimplantation genetic screening (PGS)'. Hum Reprod: 2005; 20 1 35 48
145. Verlinsky Y, Rechitsky S, Cieslak J, Tur-Kaspa I, Morris R, Kuliev A. Accuracy and outcomes of 3631 preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) cycles performed in one center. Fertil Steril: 2005; 84 01 S98
146. Pagidas K, Ying Y, Keefe D. Predictive value of preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidy screening in repeated IVF-ET cycles among women with recurrent implantation failure. J Assist Reprod Genet: 2008; 25 2-3 103 106
147. 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 1 288 295
148. Rabinowitz M, Potter D, Wemmer N, Demko Z, Gemelos G. First clinical outcomes reported on patients undergoing PGD for genetic disorders together with 24 chromosome ploidy using microarrays. Fertil Steril: 2011; 95 Suppl S6 S7
149. Treff NR, Tao X, Schillings WJ, Bergh PA, Scott RT Jr, Levy B. Use of single nucleotide polymorphism microarrays to distinguish between balanced and
150. Tur-Kaspa I, Rechitsky S, Aljadeff G, Grotjan E, Verlinsky Y. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) for all cystic fibrosis (CF) carrier couples: strategy and cost analysis. Fertil Steril: 2006; 86 Suppl S59
151. Davis LB, Champion SJ, Fair SO, Baker VL, Garber AM. A cost-benefit analysis of preimplantation genetic diagnosis for carrier couples of cystic fibrosis. Fertil Steril: 2010; 93 6 1793 1804
152. Yang Z, Liu J, Collins GS., et al. Selection of single blastocysts for fresh transfer via standard morphology assessment alone and with array CGH for good prognosis IVF patients: results from a randomized pilot study. Mol Cytogenet: 2012; 5 24 [Epub ahead of print]