The impact of patient preselection on reported IVF outcomes

Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics

Volumn 33, Issue 4, 2016, Pages 455-459

  Gleicher, Norbert ^a,b,c   Kushnir, Vitaly A ^a,d   Barad, David H ^a,b  

^a CENTER FOR HUMAN REPRODUCTION   (United States)

^b Foundation for Reproductive Medicine   (United States)

^c ROCKEFELLER UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^d WAKE FOREST SCHOOL OF MEDICINE   (United States)

Author keywords

Blastocyst stage embryo culture; Embryo banking; In vitro fertilization (IVF); Outcome reporting; Patient selection biases; Preimplantation genetic screening (PGS)

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BLASTOCYST; DEVELOPMENTAL STAGE; EMBRYO CULTURE; EMBRYO TRANSFER; FERTILIZATION IN VITRO; HUMAN; INTENTION TO TREAT ANALYSIS; LIVE BIRTH; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PATIENT SELECTION; PREGNANCY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; BIRTH RATE; FEMALE; IN VITRO FERTILIZATION; INFERTILITY THERAPY; META ANALYSIS; MULTIPLE PREGNANCY; PHYSIOLOGY; PREGNANCY RATE; PREIMPLANTATION GENETIC DIAGNOSIS;

BIRTH RATE; BLASTOCYST; EMBRYO TRANSFER; FEMALE; FERTILIZATION IN VITRO; HUMANS; PREGNANCY; PREGNANCY RATE; PREGNANCY, MULTIPLE; PREIMPLANTATION DIAGNOSIS; REPRODUCTIVE TECHNIQUES, ASSISTED;

EID: 84957689465     PISSN: 10580468     EISSN: 15737330     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10815-016-0673-9     Document Type: Article

References (41)

1. Thurin A, Hausken J, Hillensjö T, Jablonowska B, Pinborg A, Strandell A, et al. Elective single-embryo transfer versus double-embryo transfer in in vitro fertilization. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:2392–402.
2. Pavelic K, Martinovic T, Kraljevic PS. Do we understand the personalized medicine paradigm? Personalized medicine marks the beginning of a new attitude in medicine. EMBO Per. 2015;16:133–6.
3. Gardner DK, Vella P, Lane M, Wagley L, Schlenker T, Schoolcraft WB. Culture and transfer of human blastocysts increases implantation rates and reduces the need for multiple embryo transfers. Fertil Steril. 1998;69:84–8.
4. Gardner DK, Schoolcraft WB, Wagley L, Schlenker T, Stevens J, Hesla J. A prospective randomized trial of blastocyst culture and transfer in in-vitro fertilization. Hum Reprod. 1998;13:3434–40.
5. Titinen A, Halttunene M, Härkki P, Vuoristo P, Hyden-Granskog C. Elective single embryo transfer: the value of cryopreservation. Hum Reprod. 2001;16:1140–4.
6. Ozturk O, Bhahhacharya S, Templeton A. Avoiding multiple pregnancies in ART: evaluation and implementation of new strategies. Hum Reprod. 2001;16:1319–21.
7. Harper J, Coonen E, De Rycke M, Fiorentino F, Geraedts J, Goossens V, et al. What next for preimplantation genetic screening (PGS)? A position statement from the ESHRE PGD Consortium Steering Committee. Hum Reprod. 2010;25:821–3.
8. Orris JJ, Taylor TH, Gilchist JW, Hallowell SV, Glassner MJ, Winnger JD. The utility of embryo banking in order to increase the number of embryos available for preimplantation genetic screening in advanced maternal age patients. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2010;27:729–33.
9. Hashimoto S, Kato N, Saeki K, Morimoto Y. Selection of high-potential embryos by culture in poly(dimethylsiloxane) microwells and time-lapse imaging. Fertil Steril. 2012;97:332–7.
10. Rubio I, Galán A, Larreategui Z, Ayerdi F, Bellver J, Herrero J, et al. Clinical validation of embryo culture and selection of morphokinetic analysis: a randomized, controlled trial of EmbryoScope. Fertil Steril. 2014;102:1287–94.
11. Gleicher N, Kushnir VA, Barad DH. Is it time for a paradigm shift in understanding embryo selection? Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2015;13:3.
12. Schoolcraft WB, Gardner DK, Lane M, Schlenker T, Hamilton F, Meldrum DR. Blastocyst culture and transfer: analysis of results and parameters affecting outcome in two in vitro fertilization programs. Fertil Steril. 1999;72:604–9.
13. Gardner DK, Lane M, Stevens J, Schlenker T, Schoolcraft WB. Blastocyst score affects implantation and pregnancy outcome: toward a single blastocyst transfer. Fertile Steril. 2000;73:1155–8.
14. Gardner DK, Surrey E, Minjarez D, Leitz A, Stevens J, Schoolcraft WB. Single blastocyst transfer: a prospective randomized trial. Fertil Steril. 2004;81:551–5.
15. Blake DA, Farquhar CM, Johnson N, Proctor M. Cleavage stage versus blastocyst stage embryo transfer in assisted conception. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;17:CD002118.
16. Glujovsky D, Blake D, Farquhar C, Bardach A. Cleavage stage versus blastocyst stage embryo transfer in assisted reproductive technology. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;7:CD002118.
17. Schwarze JE, Balmaceda J, Pommer R. Cryopreservation in blastocyst stage effectively reduce the number of embryos cryopreserved. Rev Med Chil. 2012;140:45–9.
18. Browne LH, Graham PH. Good intentions and ICH-GCP: Trial conduct training needs to go beyond the ICH-GCP document and include the interntion-to-treat principle. Clin Trials. 2014;11:629–34.
19. Yelland LN, Sullivan TR, Voysev M, Lee KJ, Cook JA, Forbes AB. Applying the intention-to-treat principle in practice: Guidance on handling randomization errors. Clin Trials. 2015;12:418–23.
20. Kushnir VA, Vidali A, Barad DH, Gleicher N. The status of public reporting of clinical outcomes in assisted reproductive technology. Fertile Steril. 2013;100:736–41.
21. Gleicher N, Kushnir VA, Barad DH. Preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) still in search of a clinical applications: a systematic review. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2014;12:22.
22. Mastenbroek S, Twisk M, van der Veen F, Repping S. Preimplantation genetic screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs. Hum Reprod Update. 2011;17:454–66.
23. Mastenbroek S, Repping S. Preimplantation geetic screening: back to the future. Hum Reprod. 2014;29:1846–50.
24. Gleicher N, Bard DH. A review of, and commentary on, the ongoing second clinical introduction of preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) to routine IVF practice. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2012;29:1159–66.
25. 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;92:157–62.
26. Schoolcraft WB, Fragouli E, Stevens J, Munne S, Katz-Jaffe MG, Wells D. Clinical application of comprehensive chromosomal screening at the blastocyst stage. Fertil Steril. 2010;94:1700–6.
27. Schoolcraft WB, Treff NR, Stevens JM, Ferry K, Katz-Jaffe M, Scott Jr RT. Live birth outcome with trophectoderm biopsy, blastocyst vitrification, and single-nucleotide polymorphism microarray-based comprehensive chromosome screening in infertile patients. Fertil Steril. 2011;96:638–40.
28. Forman EJ, Tao X, Ferry KM, Taylor D, Treff NR, Scott Jr RT. Single embryo transfer with comprehensive chromosome screening results in improved ongoing pregnancy rates and decreased miscarriage rates. Hum Reprod. 2012;27:1217–22.
29. Forman EJ, Hong KH, Treff NR, Scott RT. Comprehensive chromosome screening and embryo selection: moving toward single euploid blastocyst transfer. Semin Reprod Med. 2012;30:236–42.
30. Forman EJ, Hong KH, Ferry KM, Tao X, Taylor D, Levy B, et al. In vitro fertilization with single euploid blastocyst transfer: a randomized controlled trial. Fertile Steril. 2013;100:107.
31. Forman EJ, Upham KM, Cheng M, Zhao T, Hong KH, Treff NR, et al. Comprehensive chromosome screening alters traditional morphology-based embryo selection: a prospective study of 100 consecutive cycles of planned fresg euploid blastocyst transfer. Fertil Steril. 2013;100:718–24.
32. Scott Jr RT, Upham KM, Forman EJ, Hong KH, Scott KL, Taylor D, et al. Blastocyst biopsy with comprehensive chromosome screening and fresh embryo transfer significantly increases in vitro fertilization implantation and delivery rates: a randomized controlled trial. Fertil Steril. 2013;100:697–703.
33. Scott Jr RT, Upham KM, Forman EJ, Zhao T, Treff NR. Cleavage-stage biopsy significantly impairs human embryonic implantation potential while blastocyst biopsy does not: a randomized and paired clinical trial. Fertil Steril. 2013;100:624–30.
34. Forman EJ, Hong KH, Franasiak JM, Scott Jr RT. Obstetrical and neonatal outcomes from BEST Tria: single embryo transfer with aneuploid screening improves outcomes after in vitro fertilization without compromising delivery rates. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2014;210:157. e1-6.
35. Scott Jr RT, Franasiak JM, Forman EJ. Comprehensive chromosome screening with synchronous blastocyst transfer: time for a paradigm shift. Fertil Steril. 2014;102:660–1.
36. Franasiak JM, Scott Jr RT. Embryonic aneuploidy: overcoming molecular genetic challeneges improves outcomes and changes practice patterns. Trends Mol Med. 2014;20:499–508.
37. Esfandiari N, Bentov Y, Casper RF. Trophectoderm biopsy for aneuploidy screening using different platforms and conflicting test results. Abstract O-034, Annual Meeting of ESHRE, Munich June 27- July 2, 2014.
38. Gleicher N, Vidali A, Braverman J, Kushnir VA, Albertini DF, Barad DH. Further evidence against use of PGS in poor prognosis patients: report of normal births after transfer of embryos reported as aneuploid. Fertil Steril. 2015;104 Suppl 3:e9.
39. Greco E, Minasi G, Fiorentino F. Healthy babies after intrauterine transfer of mosaic aneuploid blastocysts. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:2089–90.
40. Basile N, Vime P, Florensa M, Aparicio Ruiz B, Garcia Velasco JA, Remohi J, et al. The use of morphokinetics as a predictor of implantation: a multicentric study to define and validate an algorithm for embryo selection. Hum Reprod. 2015;30:276–83.
41. Dale B, Menezo Y, Coppola G. Trends, fads and ART! J Assist Reprod Genet. 2015;32:489–93.