Paving the way for a gold standard of care for infertility treatment: improving outcomes through standardization of laboratory procedures

Reproductive BioMedicine Online

Volumn 35, Issue 4, 2017, Pages 391-399

  Schoolcraft, William ^a   Meseguer, Marcos ^b  

^a National Foundation for Fertility Research   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF VALENCIA   (Spain)

Author keywords

assisted reproductive technologies; continuous embryo monitoring; embryo selection; IVF; pre implantation genetic screening; standard of care

Indexed keywords

ASSISTIVE TECHNOLOGY; CONTINUOUS EMBRYO MONITORING; CRYOPRESERVATION; CULTURE MEDIUM; EMBRYO SELECTION; ENDOMETRIUM; GENETIC SCREENING; GOLD STANDARD; HEALTH CARE QUALITY; HUMAN; IN VITRO FERTILIZATION; INFERTILITY THERAPY; LABORATORY TEST; META ANALYSIS (TOPIC); NONHUMAN; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PREIMPLANTATION GENETIC DIAGNOSIS; PROCESS OPTIMIZATION; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL (TOPIC); REVIEW; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW; TIME-LAPSE MICROSCOPY; BIRTH RATE; FEMALE; FEMALE INFERTILITY; LABORATORY TECHNIQUE; MALE; MALE INFERTILITY; PATHOPHYSIOLOGY; STANDARDS; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

BIRTH RATE; CLINICAL LABORATORY TECHNIQUES; CULTURE MEDIA; ENDOMETRIUM; FEMALE; HUMANS; INFERTILITY, FEMALE; INFERTILITY, MALE; MALE; PREIMPLANTATION DIAGNOSIS; REPRODUCTIVE TECHNIQUES, ASSISTED; STANDARD OF CARE; TREATMENT OUTCOME;

EID: 85026247900     PISSN: 14726483     EISSN: 14726491     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2017.06.023     Document Type: Review

References (87)

1. Adamson, G.D., Abusief, M.E., Palao, L.M., Gvakharia, M., Improved implantation rates of day 3 embryo transfers with the use of an automated time-lapse–enabled test to aid in embryo selection. Fertil. Steril 105 (2015), 369–375.
2. Alpha Scientists in Reproductive Medicine, The Alpha consensus meeting on cryopreservation key performance indicators and benchmarks: proceedings of an expert meeting. Reprod. Biomed. Online 25 (2012), 146–167.
3. Alpha Scientists in Reproductive Medicine and ESHRE Special Interest Group Embryology. Istanbul consensus workshop on embryo assessment: proceedings of an expert meeting. Reprod. Biomed. Online 22 (2011), 632–646.
4. Aparicio, B., Cruz, M., Meseguer, M., Is morphokinetic analysis the answer?. Reprod. Biomed. Online 27 (2013), 654–663.
5. Athayde Wirka, K., Chen, A.A., Conaghan, J., Ivani, K., Gvakharia, M., Behr, B., Suraj, V., Tan, L., Shen, S., Atypical embryo phenotypes identified by time-lapse microscopy: high prevalence and association with embryo development. Fertil. Steril 101 (2014), 1637–1648.
6. Basile, N., Caiazzo, M., Meseguer, M., What does morphokinetics add to embryo selection and in-vitro fertilization outcomes?. Curr. Opin. Obstet. Gynecol 27 (2015), 193–200.
7. Bhattacharya, S., Maheshwari, A., Mollison, J., Factors associated with failed treatment: an analysis of 121,744 women embarking on their first IVF cycles. PLoS ONE, 8, 2013, 2249.
8. Bianchi, V., Macchiarelli, G., Borini, A., Lappi, M., Cecconi, S., Miglietta, S., Familiari, G., Nottola, S.A., Fine morphological assessment of quality of human mature oocytes after slow freezing or vitrification with a device: a comparative analysis. Reprod. Biol. Endocrinol, 12, 2014, 110.
9. Bontekoe, S., Heineman, M.J., Johnson, N., Blake, D., Adherence compounds in embryo transfer media for assisted reproductive technologies. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev(2), 2014 CD007421.
10. Boosma, C.M., Kavelaars, A., Eijkemans, M.J., Lentjes, E.G., Fauser, B.C., Heijnen, C.J., Macklon, N.S., Endometrial secretion analysis identifies a cytokine profile predictive of pregnancy in IVF. Hum. Reprod 24 (2009), 1427–1435.
11. Braga, D.P., Setti, A.S., de Cássia, S., Figueira, R., Machado, R.B., Iaconelli, A. Jr., Borges, E. Jr., Patient selection criteria for blastocyst transfers in extended embryo culture programs. J. Assist. Reprod. Genet 29 (2012), 1357–1362.
12. Braude, P., Selecting the ‘best’ embryos: prospects for improvement. Reprod. Biomed. Online 27 (2013), 644–653.
13. Casado-Vela, J., Rodriquez-Suarez, E., Iloro, I., Ametzazurra, A., Alkorta, N., García-Velasco, J.A., Matorras, R., Prieto, B., González, S., Nagore, D., Simón, L., Elortza, F., Comprehensive proteomic analysis of human endometrial fluid aspirate. J. Proteome Res 8 (2009), 4622–4632.
14. Centres for Disease Control and Prevention, Assisted reproductive technology: ART trends 2002–2011. http://www.cdc.gov/art/ART2011/section5.htm#f43. (Accessed 16 August 2016)
15. Centres for Disease Control and Prevention, Assisted Reproductive Technology Fertility Clinic Success Rates Report. http://www.cdc.gov/art/pdf/2013-report/art-2013-fertility-clinic-report.pdf. (Accessed 16 August 2016)
16. Centres for Disease Control and Prevention, Assisted Reproductive Technology National Summary Report 2013. http://www.cdc.gov/art/pdf/2013-report/art_2013_national_summary_report.pdf. (Accessed 16 August 2016)
17. Chan, C., Virtanen, C., Winegarden, N.A., Colgan, T.J., Greenblatt, E.M., Discovery of biomarkers of endometrial receptivity through a minimally invasive approach: a validation study with implications for assisted reproduction. Fertil. Steril 100 (2013), 810–817.
18. Chronopoulou, E., Harper, J.C., IVF culture media: past present and future. Hum. Reprod. Update 21 (2015), 39–55.
19. ClinicalTrials.gov Single Embryo TrAnsfeR of Euploid Embryo (STAR), NCT02268786. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02268786. (Accessed 26 April 2016)
20. Cohen, J., Alikani, M., Bisignano, A., Past performance of assisted reproduction technologies as a model to predict future progress: a proposed addendum to Moore's law. Reprod. Biomed. Online 25 (2012), 585–590.
21. Conaghan, J., Chen, A.A., Willman, S.P., Ivani, K., Chenette, P.E., Boostanfar, R., Baker, V.L., Adamson, G.D., Abusief, M.E., Gvakharia, M., Loewke, K.E., Shen, S., Improving embryo selection using a computer-automated time-lapse image analysis test plus day 3 morphology: results from a prospective multicentre trial. Fertil. Steril 100 (2013), 412–419.
22. Coulam, C.B., Jeyendran, R.S., Fiddler, M., Pergament, E., Discordance among blastomeres renders preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidy ineffective. J. Assist. Reprod. Genet 24 (2007), 37–41.
23. Dahdouh, E.M., Balayla, J., Audibert, F. Genetics Committee, Wilson, R.D., Audibert, F., Brock, J.A., Campagnolo, C., Carroll, J., Chong, K., Gagnon, A., Johnson, J.A., MacDonald, W., Okun, N., Pastuck, M., Vallée-Pouliot, K., Technical update: preimplantation genetic diagnosis and screening. J. Obstet. Gynaecol. Can 37 (2015), 451–463.
24. De Vos, A., Van Landuyt, L., Santos-Ribeiro, S., Camus, M., Van de Velde, H., Tournaye, H., Verheyen, G., Cumulative live birth rates after fresh and vitrified cleavage-stage versus blastocyst-stage embryo transfer in the first treatment cycle. Hum. Reprod 31 (2016), 2442–2449.
25. Diamond, M.P., Suraj, V., Behnke, E.J., Yang, X., Angle, M.J., Lambe-Steinmiller, J.C., Watterson, R., Athayde Wirka, K., Chen, A.A., Shen, S., Using the Eeva Test™ adjunctively to traditional day 3 morphology is informative for consistent embryo assessment within a panel of embryologists with diverse experience. J. Assist. Reprod. Genet 32 (2015), 61–68.
26. Diez-Juan, A., Rubio, C., Marin, C., Martinez, S., Al-Asmar, N., Riboldi, M., Díaz-Gimeno, P., Valbuena, D., Simón, C., Mitochondrial DNA content as a viability score in human euploid embryos: less is better. Fertil. Steril 104 (2015), 534–541.
27. Dominguez, F., Meseguer, M., Aparicio-Ruiz, B., Piqueras, P., Quiñonero, A., Simón, C., New strategy for diagnosing embryo implantation potential by combining proteomics and time-lapse technologies. Fertil. Steril 104 (2015), 908–914.
28. Edgell, T.A., Rombauts, L.J., Salamonsen, L.A., Assessing receptivity in the endometrium: the need for a rapid, non-invasive test. Reprod. Biomed. Online 27 (2013), 486–496.
29. Egea, R.R., Puchalt, N.G., Escrivá, M.M., Varghese, A.C., Current and future perspectives in reproductive medicine and technology. J. Hum. Reprod. Sci 7 (2014), 73–92.
30. Forman, E.J., Tao, X., Ferry, K.M., Taylor, D., Treff, N.R., Scott, R.T. Jr., Single embryo transfer with comprehensive chromosome screening results in improved ongoing pregnancy rates and decreased miscarriage rates. Hum. Reprod 27 (2012), 1217–1222.
31. Forman, E.J., Hong, K.H., Ferry, K.M., Tao, X., Taylor, D., Levy, B., Treff, N.R., Scott, R.T. Jr., In vitro fertilization with single euploid blastocyst transfer: a randomized controlled trial. Fertil. Steril 100 (2013), 100–107.
32. Franasiak, J.M., Forman, E.J., Hong, K.H., Werner, M.D., Upham, K.M., Treff, N.R., Scott, R.T., Aneuploidy across individual chromosomes at the embryonic level in trophectoderm biopsies: changes with patient age and chromosome structure. J. Assist. Reprod. Genet 31 (2014), 1501–1509.
33. Geraedts, J., Montag, M., Magli, M.C., Repping, S., Handyside, A., Staessen, C., Harper, J., Schmutzler, A., Collins, J., Gossens, V., van der Ven, H., Vesela, K., Gianaroli, L., Polar body array CGH for prediction of the status of the corresponding oocyte. PART I: clinical results. Hum. Reprod 26 (2011), 3173–3180.
34. Glujovsky, D., Farquhar, C., Quinteiro Retamar, A.M., Alvarez Sedo, C.R., Blake, D., Cleavage stage versus blastocyst stage embryo transfer in assisted reproductive technology. Cochrane Database Syst. Rev(6), 2016 CD002118.
35. Goodman, L.R., Goldberg, J., Falcone, T., Austin, C., Desai, N., Does the addition of time-lapse morphokinetics in the selection of embryos for transfer improve pregnancy rates? A randomized controlled trial. Fertil. Steril 105 (2016), 275–285.
36. Gosden, R., Cryopreservation: a cold look at technology for fertility preservation. Fertil. Steril 96 (2011), 264–268.
37. Greco, E., Minasi, M., Fiorentino, F., Healthy Babies after Intrauterine Transfer of Mosaic Aneuploid Blastocysts. N. Engl. J. Med 373 (2015), 2089–2090.
38. Haouzi, D., Assou, S., Mahmoud, K., Tondeur, S., Réme, T., Hedon, B., De Vos, J., Hamamah, S., Gene expression profile of human endometrial receptivity: comparison between natural and stimulated cycles for the same patients. Hum. Reprod 24 (2009), 1436–1445.
39. Hardarson, T., Bungum, M., Conaghan, J., Meintjes, M., Chantilis, S.J., Molnar, L., Gunnarsson, K., Wikland, M., Noninferiority, randomized, controlled trial comparing embryo development using media developed for sequential or undisturbed culture in a time-lapse setup. Fertil. Steril 104 (2015), 1452–1459.
40. Harton, G.L., Munné, S., Surrey, M., Grifo, J., Kaplan, B., McCulloh, D.H., Griffin, D.K., Wells, D., Diminished effect of maternal age on implantation after preimplantation genetic diagnosis with array comparative genomic hybridization. Fertil. Steril 100 (2013), 1695–1703.
41. Huang, J., Yan, L., Lu, S., Zhao, N., Xie, X.S., Qiao, J., Validation of a next-generation sequencing-based protocol for 24-chromosome aneuploidy screening of blastocysts. Fertil. Steril 105 (2016), 1532–1536.
42. Human Fertilization Embryology Authority, Fertility treatment in 2013, trends and figures 2013. http://ifqtesting.blob.core.windows.net/umbraco-website/1142/hfea_fertility_trends_and_figures_2013.pdf (Accessed 28 April 2016).
43. Kaser, D.J., Racowsky, C., Reply: clinical outcomes following selection of human preimplantation embryos with time-lapse monitoring: a systematic review. Hum. Reprod. Update 20 (2015), 617–631.
44. Keskintepe, L., Sher, G., Keskintepe, M., Reproductive oocyte/embryo genetic analysis: comparison between fluorescence in-situ hybridization and comparative genomic hybridization. Reprod. Biomed. Online 15 (2007), 303–309.
45. Kopeika, J., Thornhill, A., Khalaf, Y., The effect of cryopreservation on the genome of gametes and embryos: principles of cryobiology and critical appraisal of the evidence. Hum. Reprod. Update 21 (2015), 209–227.
46. Kovacs, P., Embryo selection: the role of time-lapse monitoring. Reprod. Biol. Endocrinol, 12, 2014, 124.
47. Lee, E., Illingworth, P., Wilton, L., Chambers, G.M., The clinical effectiveness of preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidy in all 24 chromosomes (PGD-A): systematic review. Hum. Reprod 30 (2015), 473–483.
48. Li, Z., Wang, Y.A., Ledger, W., Edgar, D.H., Sullivan, E.A., Clinical outcomes following cryopreservation of blastocysts by vitrification or slow freezing: a population-based cohort study. Hum. Reprod 29 (2014), 2794–2801.
49. Liu, Y., Chapple, V., Feenan, K., Roberts, P., Matson, P., Time-lapse deselection model for human day 3 in vitro fertilization embryos: the combination of qualitative and quantitative measures of embryo growth. Fertil. Steril 90 (2016), 186–193.
50. Loutradi, K.E., Kolibianakis, E.M., Venetis, C.A., Papanikolaou, E.G., Pados, G., Bontis, I., Tarlatzis, B.C., Cryopreservation of human embryos by vitrification or slow freezing: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil. Steril 90 (2008), 186–193.
51. Ma, G.C., Chen, H.F., Yang, Y.S., Lin, W.H., Tsai, F.P., Lin, C.F., Chiu, C., Chen, M., A pilot proof-of-principle study to compare fresh and vitrified cycle preimplantation genetic screening by chromosome microarray and next generation sequencing. Mol. Cytogenet, 9, 2016, 25.
52. Maheshwari, A., Kalampokas, T., Davidson, J., Bhattacharya, S., Obstetric and perinatal outcomes in singleton pregnancies resulting from the transfer of blastocyst-stage versus cleavage-stage embryos generated through in vitro fertilization treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil. Steril 98 (2012), 368–377.
53. Mastenbroek, S., Twisk, M., van Echten-Arendts, J., Sikkema-Raddatz, B., Korevaar, J.C., Verhoeve, H.R., Vogel, N.E., Arts, E.G., de Vries, J.W., Bossuyt, P.M., Buys, C.H., Heineman, M.J., Repping, S., van der Veen, F., In vitro fertilization with preimplantation genetic screening. N. Engl. J. Med 357 (2007), 9–17.
54. Maxwell, S., Colls, P., Hodes-Wertz, B., McCulloh, D.H., McCaffrey, C., Wells, D., Munné, S., Grifo, J.A., Why do euploid embryos miscarry? A case-control study comparing the rate of aneuploidy within presumed euploid embryos that resulted in miscarriage or live birth using next-generation sequencing. Fertil. Steril 106 (2016), 1414–1419.
55. nd Annual Meeting of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryuology in Helsinki, Finland, 3–6 July 2016. Abstract P-106, 2016.
56. McReynolds, S., Vanderlinden, L., Stevens, J., Hansen, K., Schoolcraft, W.B., Katz-Jaffe, M.G., Lipocalin-1: a potential marker for noninvasive aneuploidy screening. Fertil. Steril 95 (2011), 2631–2633.
57. Meldrum, D.R., Introduction: examining the many potential reasons why euploid blastocysts do not always result in viable pregnancies: part 1. Fertil. Steril 105 (2016), 545–547.
58. Meldrum, D.R., de Ziegler, D., Introduction: examining the many potential reasons why euploid blastocysts do not always result in viable pregnancies (and deliveries): part 2. Fertil. Steril 105 (2016), 841–843.
59. Meseguer, M., Time-lapse: the remaining questions to be answered. Fertil. Steril 105 (2016), 295–296.
60. Milachich, T., New advances of preimplantation and prenatal genetic screening and noninvasive testing as a potential predictor of health status of babies. Biomed Res. Int 2014 (2014), 1–8.
61. Orvieto, R., Shuly, Y., Brengauz, M., Should pre-implantation genetic screening be implemented to routine clinical practice?. Gynecol. Endocrinol 12 (2016), 1–3.
62. Park, H., Bergh, C., Selleskog, U., Thurin-Kjelberg, A., Lundin, K., No benefit of culturing embryos in a closed system compared with a conventional incubator in terms of number of good quality embryos: results from an RCT. Hum. Reprod 30 (2015), 268–275.
63. PGDIS, Position statement on chromosome mosaicism and preimplantation aneuploidy testing at the blastocyst stage. PGDIS Newsletter, July 19, 2016. (see http://www.pgdis.org/docs/newsletter_071816.html, 2016.
64. Rienzi, L., Gracia, C., Maggiulli, R., LaBarbera, A.R., Kaser, D.J., Ubaldi, F.M., Vanderpoel, S., Racowsky, C., Oocyte, embryo and blastocyst cryopreservation in ART: systematic review and meta-analysis comparing slow-freezing versus vitrification to produce evidence for the development of global guidance. Hum. Reprod. Update 23 (2017), 139–155.
65. nd Annual Meeting of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology in Helsinki, Finland, 3–6 July 2016. Abstract P-642, 2016.
66. Roy, T.K., Brandi, S., Tappe, N.M., Bradley, C.K., Vom, E., Henderson, C., Lewis, C., Battista, K., Hobbs, B., Hobbs, S., Syer, J., Lanyon, S.R., Dopheide, S.M., Peura, T.T., McArthur, S.J., Bowman, M.C., Stojanov, T., Embryo vitrification using a novel semi-automated closed system yields in vitro outcomes equivalent to manual Cryotop method. Hum. Reprod 29 (2014), 2431–2438.
67. Roy, T.K., Brandi, S., Bradley, C.K., Automatic vitrification: development of the Gavi system. Tucker, M.J., Liebermann, J., (eds.) Vitrification in Assisted Reproduction, second ed., 2016, CRC Press, Florida, 61–69.
68. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, Multiple Pregnancy Following Assisted Reproduction. https://www.rcog.org.uk/globalassets/documents/guidelines/sip_no_22.pdf, 2011. (Accessed 26 April 2016)
69. Rubio, I., Galán, A., Larreategui, Z., Ayerdi, F., Bellver, J., Herrero, J., Meseguer, M., Clinical validation of embryo culture and selection by morphokinetic analysis: a randomized, controlled trial of the EmbryoScope. Fertil. Steril 102 (2014), 1287–1294.
70. Sánchez-Ribas, J., Riqueros, M., Vime, P., Puchades-Carrasco, L., Jönsson, T., Pineda-Lucena, A., Ballesteros, A., Domínguez, F., Simón, C., Differential metabolic profiling of non-pure trisomy 21 human preimplantation embryos. Fertil. Steril 98 (2012), 1157–1164.
71. Sachdev, N.M., Maxwell, S.M., Besser, A.G., Grifo, A.J., Diagnosis and clinical management of embryonic mosaicism. Fertil. Steril 107 (2017), 6–11.
72. Scott, R.T., Upham, K.M., Forman, E.F., Hong, K.H., Scott, K.L., Taylor, D., Tao, X., Treff, N.R., Blastocyst biopsy with comprehensive chromosome screening and fresh embryo transfer significantly increases IVF IRs and delivery rates: a randomized controlled trial. Fertil. Steril 100 (2013), 697–703.
73. Scott, R.T. Jr., Upham, K.M., Forman, E.J., Zhao, T., Treff, N.R., Cleavage-stage biopsy significantly impairs human embryonic implantation potential while blastocyst biopsy does not: a randomized and paired clinical trial. Fertil. Steril 100 (2013), 624–630.
74. Sermon, K., Capalbo, A., Cohen, J., Coonen, E., De Rycke, M., De Vos, A., Delhanty, J., Fiorentino, F., Gleicher, N., Griesinger, G., Grifo, J., Handyside, A., Harper, J., Kokkali, G., Mastenbroek, S., Meldrum, D., Meseguer, M., Montag, M., Munné, S., Rienzi, L., Rubio, C., Scott, K., Scott, R., Simon, C., Swain, J., Treff, N., Ubaldi, F., Vassena, R., Vermeesch, J.R., Verpoest, W., Wells, D., Geraedts, J., The why, the how and the when of PGS 2.0: current practices and expert opinions of fertility specialists, molecular biologists, and embryologists. Mol. Hum. Reprod 22 (2016), 845–857.
75. Simon, A., Laufer, N., Assessment and treatment of repeated implantation failure (RIF). J. Assist. Reprod. Genet 29 (2012), 1227–1239.
76. Simpson, J.L., Preimplantation genetic diagnosis to improve pregnancy outcomes in subfertility. Best Pract. Res. Clin. Obstet. Gynaecol 26 (2012), 805–815.
77. Steptoe, P., Edwards, R.G., Birth after the reimplantation of a human embryo. Lancet, 2, 1978, 366.
78. Sunkara, S.K., Khalaf, Y., Maheschwari, A., Seed, P., Coomarasamy, A., Association between response to ovarian stimulation and miscarriage following IVF: an analysis of 124 351 IVF pregnancies. Hum. Reprod 29 (2014), 1218–1224.
79. VerMilyea, M.D., Tan, L., Anthony, J.T., Conaghan, J., Ivani, K., Gvakharia, M., Boostanfar, R., Baker, V.L., Suraj, V., Chen, A.A., Mainigi, M., Coutifaris, C., Shen, S., Computer-automated time-lapse analysis results correlate with embryo implantation and clinical pregnancy: a blinded, multi-centre study. Reprod. Biomed. Online 29 (2014), 729–736.
80. Wang, S.X., The past, present and future of embryo selection in in vitro fertilization: Frontiers in Reproductive Conference. Yale J. Biol. Med 84 (2011), 487–490.
81. Wells, D., Kaur, K., Grifo, J., Glassner, M.J., Taylor, J.C., Fragouli, E., Munne, S., Clinical utilisation of a rapid low-pass whole genome sequencing technique for the diagnosis of aneuploidy in human embryos prior to implantation. J. Med. Genet 51 (2014), 553–562.
82. nd Annual Meeting of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryuology in Helsinki, Finland, 3–6 July 2016. Abstract O-058, 2016.
83. Wolff, H., Fredrickson, J., Walker, D., Morbeck, D.E., Advances in quality control: mouse embryo morphokinetics are sensitive markers of in vitro stress. Hum. Reprod 28 (2013), 1776–1782.
84. Yanez, L.Z., Han, J., Behr, B.B., Reijo Pera, R.A., Camarillo, D.B., Human oocyte developmental potential is predicted by mechanical properties within hours after fertilization. Nat. Commun, 7, 2016, 10809.
85. Yang, Z., Liu, J.J., Collins, G.S., Salem, S.A., Liu, X., Lyle, S.S., Peck, A.C., Sills, E.S., Salem, R.D., 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, 5, 2012, 24.
86. Yang, Z., Zhang, J., Salem, S.A., Liu, X., Kuang, Y., Salem, R.D., Liu, J., Selection of competent blastocysts for transfer by combining time-lapse monitoring and array CGH testing for patients undergoing preimplantation genetic screening: a prospective study with sibling oocytes. BMC Med. Genomics, 7, 2014, 38.
87. Zhao, Y., Brezina, P., Hsu, C.C., Garcia, J., Brinsden, P.R., Wallach, E., In vitro fertilization: four decades of reflections and promises. Biochim. Biophys. Acta 1810 (2011), 843–852.