Skip Navigation


Hum. Reprod. Advance Access originally published online on May 6, 2004
This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF ) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
19/7/1502    most recent
deh293v1
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (7)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Carp, H.J.A.
Right arrow Articles by Grudzinskas, J.G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Carp, H.J.A.
Right arrow Articles by Grudzinskas, J.G.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Human Reproduction, Vol. 19, No. 7, 1502-1505, July 2004
© 2004 European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology

ART in recurrent miscarriage: preimplantation genetic diagnosis/screening or surrogacy?

H.J.A. Carp1,3, M. Dirnfeld2, J. Dor1 and J.G. Grudzinskas2

1 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sheba Medical Center, Tel Hashomer and University of Tel Aviv, Israel and 2 The Bridge Centre, London, UK

3 To whom correspondence should be addressed at: Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sheba Medical Center, Tel Hashomer 52621, Israel. e-mail: carp{at}netvision.net.il

Recently, assisted reproductive techniques have been used to prevent further miscarriages in women with recurrent miscarriage. One approach uses either screening or diagnosis of embryonic chromosomes prior to embryo replacement [preimplantation genetic screening (PGS)/preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD)]. The second approach involves surrogacy. However, PGS/PGD assumes that the embryo is chromosomally abnormal, and that the mother should receive a chromosomally normal embryo. Surrogacy assumes that the embryo is normal and that the maternal environment needs to be substituted. This article examines the place of both techniques in different types of recurrent miscarriage, and tries to give guidelines as to which technique is preferable depending on the likelihood of an embryonic chromosome aberration. In repeated fetal aneuploidy or in the older patient, PGS or PGD are preferable. However, with high numbers of miscarriages, or in autoimmune pregnancy loss, surrogacy is preferable. In the light of recent work, it is uncertain which treatment mode is indicated in balanced parental chromosome aberrations. In conclusion, both techniques have a place, but probably only in those patients with a poor prognosis in whom assisted reproductive techniques will be shown to improve the subsequent live birth rate above the spontaneous rate.

Key words: PGD/PGS/recurrent miscarriage/surrogacy


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
K. Keymolen, C. Staessen, W. Verpoest, A. Michiels, M. Bonduelle, P. Haentjens, J. Vanderelst, and I. Liebaers
A proposal for reproductive counselling in carriers of Robertsonian translocations: 10 years of experience with preimplantation genetic diagnosis
Hum. Reprod., June 3, 2009; (2009) dep201v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 BMJHome page
M. T M Franssen, J. C Korevaar, F. van der Veen, N. J Leschot, P. M M Bossuyt, and M. Goddijn
Reproductive outcome after chromosome analysis in couples with two or more miscarriages: case-control study
BMJ, April 1, 2006; 332(7544): 759 - 763.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
M. Sugiura-Ogasawara and K. Suzumori
Can preimplantation genetic diagnosis improve success rates in recurrent aborters with translocations?
Hum. Reprod., December 1, 2005; 20(12): 3267 - 3270.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.