Skip Navigation



Hum. Reprod. Advance Access published online on January 30, 2009
Human Reproduction, doi:10.1093/humrep/den502
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF )
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
24/5/1212    most recent
den502v1
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 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 Beyer, C.E.
Right arrow Articles by Gras, L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Beyer, C.E.
Right arrow Articles by Gras, L.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author 2009. 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

Preimplantation genetic screening outcomes are associated with culture conditions

C.E. Beyer1,3, T. Osianlis1, K. Boekel1, E. Osborne1, L. Rombauts1, J. Catt1, V. Kralevski1, B.S. Aali2 and L. Gras1

1 Department of Genetics, Monash IVF, Suite 1, 252 Clayton Road, Clayton, Victoria 3168, Australia 2 Kerman University of Medical Sciences, Kerman, Iran

3 Correspondence address. Tel: +61 3 9590 8323; Fax: +61 3 9548 9150; E-mail: cbeyer{at}monashivf.com

BACKGROUND: Although preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) is widely offered, there are contradictory reports on the clinical merit of this procedure. Any gain from embryo selection following aneuploidy screening must significantly outweigh the impact of the procedure. Variability of technical expertise in embryo biopsy, blastomere fixation, fluorescence in situ hybridization analysis, along with suboptimal laboratory quality control and inappropriate patient selection may impact PGS outcomes.

METHODS: To investigate such effects, a total of 1508 stimulated in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles were retrospectively analysed. During 2004, a significant change was made to the embryo culture media used. Clinical outcomes from cycles with PGS were compared prior to and after the change in media and compared with matched controls not utilizing PGS during the same period.

RESULTS: Clinical PGS success rates were found to improve following the media change. For patients aged less than 40, clinical outcomes following PGS were significantly lower than those without PGS prior to the change, but became equivalent after the change. For patients ≥40 years and ≤2 previous stimulated IVF cycles, clinical outcomes with PGS were similar to those without PGS prior to the change but became significantly improved after the change.

CONCLUSION: These results suggest that a laboratory procedure change may significantly impact PGS patient outcomes.

Key words: preimplantation genetic screening/aneuploidy screening/advanced maternal age/laboratory procedures

Submitted on October 22, 2008; resubmitted on December 18, 2008; accepted on December 28, 2008.


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




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.