Hum. Reprod. Advance Access originally published online on January 4, 2007
Human Reproduction 2007 22(4):980-988; doi:10.1093/humrep/del484
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Milder ovarian stimulation for in-vitro fertilization reduces aneuploidy in the human preimplantation embryo: a randomized controlled trial
1 Department of Reproductive Medicine and Gynaecology, University Medical Center, Utrecht, The Netherlands 2 Division of Reproductive Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology 3 Department of Public Health 4 Department of Clinical Genetics, Erasmus Medical Center, Rotterdam, The Netherlands 5 Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Medical Center Rijnmond Zuid, Rotterdam, The Netherlands
6 To whom correspondence should be addressed at: Department of Reproductive Medicine and Gynecology, University Medical Center, Heidelberglaan 100, 3584 CX Utrecht, The Netherlands. Tel.: +31 30 250 1443; Fax: +31 30 250 5433; E-mail: e.b.baart{at}umcutrecht.nl
BACKGROUND: To test whether ovarian stimulation for in-vitro fertilization (IVF) affects oocyte quality and thus chromosome segregation behaviour during meiosis and early embryo development, preimplantation genetic screening of embryos was employed in a prospective, randomized controlled trial, comparing two ovarian stimulation regimens.
METHODS: Infertile patients under 38 years of age were randomly assigned to undergo a mild stimulation regimen using gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist co-treatment (67 patients), which does not disrupt secondary follicle recruitment, or a conventional high-dose exogenous gonadotrophin regimen and GnRH agonist co-treatment (44 patients). Following IVF, embryos were biopsied at the eight-cell stage and the copy number of 10 chromosomes was analysed in 1 or 2 blastomeres.
RESULTS: The study was terminated prematurely, after an unplanned interim analysis (which included 61% of the planned number of patients) found a lower embryo aneuploidy rate following mild stimulation. Compared with conventional stimulation, significantly fewer oocytes and embryos were obtained following mild stimulation (P < 0.01 and < 0.05, respectively). Consequently, both regimens generated on average a similar number (1.8) of chromosomally normal embryos. Differences in rates of mosaic embryos suggest an effect of ovarian stimulation on mitotic segregation errors.
CONCLUSIONS: Future ovarian stimulation strategies should avoid maximizing oocyte yield, but aim at generating a sufficient number of chromosomally normal embryos by reduced interference with ovarian physiology.
Key words: aneuploidy/embryo quality/in-vitro fertilization/ovarian stimulation/preimplantation genetic screening
Submitted on August 23, 2006; resubmitted on October 17, 2006; resubmitted on November 8, 2006; accepted on November 29, 2006.
CiteULike 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
|
|
 |
|
  J. C. Boxmeer, R. P.M. Steegers-Theunissen, J. Lindemans, M. F. Wildhagen, E. Martini, E. A.P. Steegers, and N. S. Macklon Homocysteine metabolism in the pre-ovulatory follicle during ovarian stimulation Hum. Reprod., July 29, 2008; (2008) den292v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
W. Verpoest, B.C. Fauser, E. Papanikolaou, C. Staessen, L. Van Landuyt, P. Donoso, H. Tournaye, I. Liebaers, and P. Devroey Chromosomal aneuploidy in embryos conceived with unstimulated cycle IVF Hum. Reprod., July 10, 2008; (2008) den269v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Twisk, S. Mastenbroek, A. Hoek, M.-J. Heineman, F. van der Veen, P. M Bossuyt, S. Repping, and J. C Korevaar No beneficial effect of preimplantation genetic screening in women of advanced maternal age with a high risk for embryonic aneuploidy Hum. Reprod., June 21, 2008; (2008) den231v1. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 M. Costa and D. Colia Treating infertility in autoimmune patients Rheumatology, June 1, 2008; 47(suppl_3): iii38 - iii41. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
B.C. Jacod, K.D. Lichtenbelt, G.H. Schuring-Blom, J.S.E. Laven, D. van Opstal, M.J.C. Eijkemans, N.S. Macklon, and on behalf of the IVF-CPM Study Group Does confined placental mosaicism account for adverse perinatal outcomes in IVF pregnancies? Hum. Reprod., May 1, 2008; 23(5): 1107 - 1112. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 C. M. Ogilvie Preimplantation testing for chromosome aneuploidy Obstet Gynaecol (Lond), April 1, 2008; 10(2): 88 - 92. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Polinder, E.M.E.W. Heijnen, N.S. Macklon, J.D.F. Habbema, B.J.C.M. Fauser, and M.J.C. Eijkemans Cost-effectiveness of a mild compared with a standard strategy for IVF: a randomized comparison using cumulative term live birth as the primary endpoint Hum. Reprod., February 1, 2008; 23(2): 316 - 323. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
C. Alvarez, I. Alonso-Muriel, G. Garcia, J. Crespo, J. Bellver, C. Simon, and A. Pellicer Implantation is apparently unaffected by the dopamine agonist Cabergoline when administered to prevent ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome in women undergoing assisted reproduction treatment: a pilot study Hum. Reprod., December 1, 2007; 22(12): 3210 - 3214. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
G. Nargund, B.C.J.M. Fauser, N.S. Macklon, W. Ombelet, K. Nygren, R. Frydman, and for the Rotterdam ISMAAR Consensus Group on Termin The ISMAAR proposal on terminology for ovarian stimulation for IVF Hum. Reprod., November 1, 2007; 22(11): 2801 - 2804. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
R. Ciriminna, M.L. Papale, P.G. Artini, M. Costa, L. De Santis, L. Gandini, L. Parmegiani, G. Ragni, A. Revelli, L. Rienzi, et al. Impact of Italian legislation regulating assisted reproduction techniques on ICSI outcomes in severe male factor infertility: a multicentric survey Hum. Reprod., September 1, 2007; 22(9): 2481 - 2487. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. A. Collins Preimplantation Genetic Screening in Older Mothers N. Engl. J. Med., July 5, 2007; 357(1): 61 - 63. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|