Hum. Reprod. Advance Access published online on December 24, 2007
Human Reproduction, doi:10.1093/humrep/dem396
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
© 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
What are the trade-offs between one-cell and two-cell biopsies of preimplantation embryos?
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., 2007
). Nonetheless, PGD is one of the fastest growing technologies in assisted reproduction (Sermon et al., 2007
). 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
![]()
CiteULike
Connotea
Del.icio.us What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
K. Yakin and B. Urman What next for preimplantation genetic screening? A clinician's perspective Hum. Reprod., August 1, 2008; 23(8): 1686 - 1690. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
