使用综合染色体筛查对体外受精中的非整倍体进行植入前遗传学检测:系统回顾与元分析》。

IF 2.3 Q2 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY International Journal of Fertility & Sterility Pub Date : 2024-06-09 DOI:10.22074/ijfs.2023.1996379.1450
Omur Taskin, Alyssa Hochberg, Justin Tan, Lauren Adye-White, Arriane Albert, Seang-Lin Tan, Suresh Nair, Timothy Rowe, Mohamed A Bedaiwy, Michael H Dahan
{"title":"使用综合染色体筛查对体外受精中的非整倍体进行植入前遗传学检测:系统回顾与元分析》。","authors":"Omur Taskin, Alyssa Hochberg, Justin Tan, Lauren Adye-White, Arriane Albert, Seang-Lin Tan, Suresh Nair, Timothy Rowe, Mohamed A Bedaiwy, Michael H Dahan","doi":"10.22074/ijfs.2023.1996379.1450","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The utility of pre-implantation genetic testing (PGT-A) is controversial, with older meta-analyses demonstrating improved pregnancy outcomes, while newer trials have not shown benefit. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis which aimed to evaluate the benefits of PGT-A using comprehensive chromosome screening (CCS) and its effects on <i>in vitro</i> fertilization (IVF) outcomes among randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We conducted a systematic search to identify RCTs comparing women undergoing PGT-A with CSS with women not undergoing PGT-A, from inception to December 2020. Random effects meta-analysis was utilized to calculate average odds ratios (OR) for clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), ongoing pregnancy rate (OPR), and miscarriage rate (MR). The heterogeneity of exposure was assessed using Forest plots and I2 statistics. Publication bias was evaluated using Egger's test. Among 1251 citations, seven RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Biopsies of embryos were carried out at various developmental stages, including polar body, day 3, and day 5-6 of culture. Data was analyzed as all studies and blastocyst only. Meta-analysis failed to show improvement in OPRs using PGT-A in the all ages, <35 years old and ≥35 years old age groups. There was also no significant difference in CPRs in any group. The MR decreased with the use of PGT-A (among all biopsy types and among blastocyst biopsies) in the all-ages group, but not when stratifying according to patient age <35 and ≥35 years old. More data regarding the risks and advantages of PGT-A are needed to make a final decision on the value of this intervention in clinical practice. The exact magnitude of the benefit of PGT-A selection cannot be correctly determined until multiple standardized protocol IVF PGT-A trials are conducted.</p>","PeriodicalId":14080,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Fertility & Sterility","volume":"18 3","pages":"185-194"},"PeriodicalIF":2.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11245579/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Preimplantation Genetic Testing for Aneuploidy in <i>In Vitro</i> Fertilization Using Comprehensive Chromosome Screening: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.\",\"authors\":\"Omur Taskin, Alyssa Hochberg, Justin Tan, Lauren Adye-White, Arriane Albert, Seang-Lin Tan, Suresh Nair, Timothy Rowe, Mohamed A Bedaiwy, Michael H Dahan\",\"doi\":\"10.22074/ijfs.2023.1996379.1450\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>The utility of pre-implantation genetic testing (PGT-A) is controversial, with older meta-analyses demonstrating improved pregnancy outcomes, while newer trials have not shown benefit. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis which aimed to evaluate the benefits of PGT-A using comprehensive chromosome screening (CCS) and its effects on <i>in vitro</i> fertilization (IVF) outcomes among randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We conducted a systematic search to identify RCTs comparing women undergoing PGT-A with CSS with women not undergoing PGT-A, from inception to December 2020. Random effects meta-analysis was utilized to calculate average odds ratios (OR) for clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), ongoing pregnancy rate (OPR), and miscarriage rate (MR). The heterogeneity of exposure was assessed using Forest plots and I2 statistics. Publication bias was evaluated using Egger's test. Among 1251 citations, seven RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Biopsies of embryos were carried out at various developmental stages, including polar body, day 3, and day 5-6 of culture. Data was analyzed as all studies and blastocyst only. Meta-analysis failed to show improvement in OPRs using PGT-A in the all ages, <35 years old and ≥35 years old age groups. There was also no significant difference in CPRs in any group. The MR decreased with the use of PGT-A (among all biopsy types and among blastocyst biopsies) in the all-ages group, but not when stratifying according to patient age <35 and ≥35 years old. More data regarding the risks and advantages of PGT-A are needed to make a final decision on the value of this intervention in clinical practice. The exact magnitude of the benefit of PGT-A selection cannot be correctly determined until multiple standardized protocol IVF PGT-A trials are conducted.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":14080,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Fertility & Sterility\",\"volume\":\"18 3\",\"pages\":\"185-194\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-09\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11245579/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Fertility & Sterility\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.22074/ijfs.2023.1996379.1450\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Fertility & Sterility","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22074/ijfs.2023.1996379.1450","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

胚胎植入前基因检测(PGT-A)的效用存在争议,较早的荟萃分析表明妊娠结局有所改善,而较新的试验则未显示出其益处。因此,我们进行了一项荟萃分析,旨在评估使用全面染色体筛查(CCS)进行 PGT-A 的益处及其对随机对照试验(RCT)中体外受精(IVF)结果的影响。我们进行了系统性检索,以确定从开始到 2020 年 12 月期间将接受 PGT-A 和 CSS 的女性与未接受 PGT-A 的女性进行比较的 RCT。随机效应荟萃分析用于计算临床妊娠率(CPR)、持续妊娠率(OPR)和流产率(MR)的平均几率比(OR)。使用森林图和I2统计量评估了暴露的异质性。发表偏倚采用 Egger 检验进行评估。在 1251 篇引用文献中,有 7 篇研究性试验符合纳入标准。胚胎活检在不同的发育阶段进行,包括极体、培养第 3 天和第 5-6 天。数据按所有研究和仅囊胚进行分析。Meta 分析表明,使用 PGT-A 未能改善所有年龄段的 OPRs、
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Preimplantation Genetic Testing for Aneuploidy in In Vitro Fertilization Using Comprehensive Chromosome Screening: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

The utility of pre-implantation genetic testing (PGT-A) is controversial, with older meta-analyses demonstrating improved pregnancy outcomes, while newer trials have not shown benefit. Therefore, we performed a meta-analysis which aimed to evaluate the benefits of PGT-A using comprehensive chromosome screening (CCS) and its effects on in vitro fertilization (IVF) outcomes among randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We conducted a systematic search to identify RCTs comparing women undergoing PGT-A with CSS with women not undergoing PGT-A, from inception to December 2020. Random effects meta-analysis was utilized to calculate average odds ratios (OR) for clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), ongoing pregnancy rate (OPR), and miscarriage rate (MR). The heterogeneity of exposure was assessed using Forest plots and I2 statistics. Publication bias was evaluated using Egger's test. Among 1251 citations, seven RCTs met the inclusion criteria. Biopsies of embryos were carried out at various developmental stages, including polar body, day 3, and day 5-6 of culture. Data was analyzed as all studies and blastocyst only. Meta-analysis failed to show improvement in OPRs using PGT-A in the all ages, <35 years old and ≥35 years old age groups. There was also no significant difference in CPRs in any group. The MR decreased with the use of PGT-A (among all biopsy types and among blastocyst biopsies) in the all-ages group, but not when stratifying according to patient age <35 and ≥35 years old. More data regarding the risks and advantages of PGT-A are needed to make a final decision on the value of this intervention in clinical practice. The exact magnitude of the benefit of PGT-A selection cannot be correctly determined until multiple standardized protocol IVF PGT-A trials are conducted.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
68
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: International Journal of Fertility & Sterility is a quarterly English publication of Royan Institute . The aim of the journal is to disseminate information through publishing the most recent scientific research studies on Fertility and Sterility and other related topics. Int J Fertil Steril has been certified by Ministry of Culture and Islamic Guidance in 2007 and was accredited as a scientific and research journal by HBI (Health and Biomedical Information) Journal Accreditation Commission in 2008. Int J Fertil Steril is an Open Access journal.
期刊最新文献
A Combination of Artificial Intelligence with Genetic Algorithms on Static Time-Lapse Images Improves Consistency in Blastocyst Assessment, An Interpretable Tool to Automate Human Embryo Evaluation: A Retrospective Cohort Study. Nanocurcumin Decreases Nucleotide-Binding Oligomerization Domain-Like Receptor Family Pyrin Domain-Containing 3 Complex Expressions in An Experimental Testicular Torsion Model. Non-Hormonal Therapy for Endometriosis Based on Angiogenesis, Oxidative Stress and Inflammation. Potential Effects of Soy Isoflavones and Broccoli Extract on Oxidative Stress, Autophagy, and Apoptosis Gene Markers in Endometriosis. The Effect of Hepatitis B Virus Infection on Semen Quality of Infertile Men: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1