4.4 Article

Preimplantation Genetic Testing for Aneuploidy Improves Clinical, Gestational, and Neonatal Outcomes in Advanced Maternal Age Patients Without Compromising Cumulative Live-Birth Rate.

期刊

JOURNAL OF ASSISTED REPRODUCTION AND GENETICS
卷 36, 期 12, 页码 2493-2504

出版社

SPRINGER/PLENUM PUBLISHERS
DOI: 10.1007/s10815-019-01609-4

关键词

Preimplantation genetic testing; Advanced maternal age; Clinical outcome; Miscarriage; Aneuploidy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Purpose To report the effects of blastocyst stage aneuploidy testing on clinical, gestational, and neonatal outcomes for patients of advanced maternal age undergoing IVF. Methods This is a single-center observational-cohort study with 2 years follow-up. The study includes a total of 2538 couples undergoing 2905 egg collections (control group), 308 (PGT-A), and 106 (drop-out group, consenting for PGT-A but withdrawing due to poor embryological outcome) Results Compared with control group, PGT-A showed improved clinical outcomes (live-birth rate per transferred embryo, LBR 40.3% vs 11.0%) and reduced multiple pregnancy rate (MPR, 0% vs 11.1%) and pregnancy loss (PL, 3.6% vs 22.6%). Drop-out group showed the worst clinical outcomes suggesting that abandoning PGT-A due to poor response to ovarian stimulation is not a favorable option. Cytogenetic analysis of product of conceptions and CVS/amniocentesis showed higher aneuploid pregnancy rates for control group regardless of embryo transfer strategy (0%, 17.9%, and 19.9%, for PGT-A, control day 5 and day 3, respectively). Multivariate analysis showed no negative impact of PGT-A-related interventions on cumulative delivery rate (26.3%, 95% CI 21.5-31.6 vs 24.0%, 95% CI 22.5-25.6 for PGT-A and control, respectively) and on neonatal outcomes. Conclusion PGT-A improves clinical outcomes, particularly by reducing pregnancy loss and chromosomally abnormal pregnancy for patients of advanced maternal age, with no major impact on cumulative live-birth rate (CLBR) per egg retrieval.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据