{"title":"Diagnóstico genético pre-implantacional no invasivo como método de detección de aneuploidías embrionarias: una revisión sistemática","authors":"Abraham Zavala-Garcia , Juan M. Moreno-Garcia","doi":"10.1016/j.medre.2021.100108","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Introduction</h3><p>The primary aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the available current scientific evidence on non-invasive PGT-A (niPGT-A) in regards to cell free DNA (cf-DNA) detection in spent culture media (SCM), cf-DNA amplification, and concordance rates against conventional PGT-A.</p></div><div><h3>Search Methods</h3><p>We performed an exhaustive systematic search through major databases for original experimental research, from a period of conception to March 2020, using a combination of the following search words: blastocele/blastoceol fluid, blastoscentesis, cell-free DNA embryo, embryo aneuploidy preimplantation, embryo biopsy preimplantation, noninvasive pgt, preimplantation diagnosis, spent embryo culture media, and trophoectoderm (TE) biopsy.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Our search yielded 26 studies for a qualitative and 15 for quantitative analysis. Our main results report that cf-DNA is detectable in SCM in 100% of ART (IVF/ICSI) treatments at a rate of 44.4-100% per sample. The average concentration of cf-DNA is 37.42 ng/μL. General concordance rates between cf-DNA and TE biopsy range from 54.9 to 100% (average 78.32% ± 14.55). We found important discrepancies between niPGT-A methodologies carried out by different ART centers, such as culture volume, SCM storage temperature, women embryo donors' age, embryo quality, use of negative/sham controls, time of SCM collection, and genetic analysis platforms/systems.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>There are many ways in which niPGT-A may be optimized, according to current scientific evidence. However, there are many important questions that remain unanswered in order to standardize niPGT-A as routine practice in ART.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100911,"journal":{"name":"Medicina Reproductiva y Embriología Clínica","volume":"9 1","pages":"Article 100108"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Medicina Reproductiva y Embriología Clínica","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2340932021000189","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction
The primary aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the available current scientific evidence on non-invasive PGT-A (niPGT-A) in regards to cell free DNA (cf-DNA) detection in spent culture media (SCM), cf-DNA amplification, and concordance rates against conventional PGT-A.
Search Methods
We performed an exhaustive systematic search through major databases for original experimental research, from a period of conception to March 2020, using a combination of the following search words: blastocele/blastoceol fluid, blastoscentesis, cell-free DNA embryo, embryo aneuploidy preimplantation, embryo biopsy preimplantation, noninvasive pgt, preimplantation diagnosis, spent embryo culture media, and trophoectoderm (TE) biopsy.
Results
Our search yielded 26 studies for a qualitative and 15 for quantitative analysis. Our main results report that cf-DNA is detectable in SCM in 100% of ART (IVF/ICSI) treatments at a rate of 44.4-100% per sample. The average concentration of cf-DNA is 37.42 ng/μL. General concordance rates between cf-DNA and TE biopsy range from 54.9 to 100% (average 78.32% ± 14.55). We found important discrepancies between niPGT-A methodologies carried out by different ART centers, such as culture volume, SCM storage temperature, women embryo donors' age, embryo quality, use of negative/sham controls, time of SCM collection, and genetic analysis platforms/systems.
Conclusions
There are many ways in which niPGT-A may be optimized, according to current scientific evidence. However, there are many important questions that remain unanswered in order to standardize niPGT-A as routine practice in ART.