Skip Navigation


Hum. Reprod. Advance Access originally published online on December 24, 2007
Human Reproduction 2008 23(3):493-498; doi:10.1093/humrep/dem396
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF )
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
23/3/493    most recent
dem396v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
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 arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Combelles, C. M.H.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Combelles, C. M.H.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2007. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

ASSOCIATE EDITOR'S COMMENT ON THE FAST-TRACK ARTICLE ‘DIAGNOSTIC EFFICIENCY, EMBRYONIC DEVELOPMENT AND CLINICAL OUTCOME AFTER THE BIOPSY OF ONE OR TWO BLASTOMERES FOR PREIMPLANTATION GENETIC DIAGNOSIS’ BY GOOSENS ET AL

What are the trade-offs between one-cell and two-cell biopsies of preimplantation embryos?

Catherine M.H. Combelles1

Biology Department, Middlebury College, McCardell Bicentennial Hall 346, Middlebury, VT 05753, USA

1 Correspondence address. Tel: +1-802-443-5251; Fax: +1-802-443-2071; E-mail: ccombell@middlebury.edu

Key words: preimplantation genetic diagnosis/preimplantation genetic screening/blastomere biopsy/diagnostic efficiency/clinical outcome

The first 150 words of the full text of this article appear below.

The fast changing landscape of reproductive technologies has experienced its share of controversies, among which is the genetic screening of preimplantation embryos. In principle, preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD), for known genetic afflictions, and preimplantation genetic screening (PGS), for aneuploidy detection, provide an option for fertile and infertile patients to detect any abnormal embryos and thus presumably augment implantation and take-home baby rates. In practice, PGD and PGS are not yet offered by all fertility centers with only 4–6% of IVF cycles combined with PGD in the USA (Baruch et al., 2007Go). Nonetheless, PGD is one of the fastest growing technologies in assisted reproduction (Sermon et al., 2007Go). Some experts even predict it to become one day a procedure ancillary to routine IVF cycles. Yet a divide characterizes the field, notably with respect to the potential clinical benefits of PGD/PGS. Regardless of which side of the divide . . . [Full Text of this Article]


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. Yakin and B. Urman
What next for preimplantation genetic screening? A clinician's perspective
Hum. Reprod., June 24, 2008; (2008) den241v1.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]