IVF/ICSI with or without preimplantation genetic screening for aneuploidy in couples without genetic disorders: a systematic review and meta-analysis

  • Miguel A. Checa
  • Pablo Alonso-Coello
  • Ivan Solà
  • Ana Robles
  • Ramón Carreras
  • Juan Balasch
GENETICS

Abstract

Purpose

To assess the efficacy of preimplantation genetic screening to increase ongoing pregnancy rates in couples without known genetic disorders.

Methods

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Two reviewers independently determined study eligibility and extracted data.

Results

Ten randomized trials (1,512 women) were included. The quality of evidence was moderate. Meta-analyses using a random-effects model suggest that PGS has a lower rate of ongoing pregnancies (risk ratio=0.73, 95% confidence interval 0.62–0.87) and a lower rate of live births (risk ratio=0.76, 95% confidence interval 0.64–0.91) than standard in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection.

Conclusions

In women with poor prognosis or in general in vitro fertilization program, in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection with preimplantation genetic screening for aneuploidy does not increase but instead was associated with lower rates of ongoing pregnancies and live births. The use of preimplantation genetic screening in daily practice does not appear to be justified.

Keywords

Meta-analysis Preimplantation genetic screening Aneuploidy IVF/ICSI Advanced maternal age Recurrent pregnancy loss Repeated IVF failure 

References

  1. 1.
    Soini S, Ibarreta D, Anastasiadou V, Aymé S, Braga S, Cornel M, et al. The interface between assisted reproductive technologies and genetics: technical, social, ethical and legal issues. Eur J Hum Genet. 2006;14:588–645.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Balasch J. Investigation of the infertile couple in the era of assisted reproductive technology: a time for reappraisal. Hum Reprod. 2000;15:2251–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ng EHY, Ho PC. Ageing and ART: a waste of time and money? Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2007;21:5–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    ESHRE Capri Workshop Group. Fertility and ageing. Hum Reprod Update. 2005;11:261–76.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    The Practice Committee of the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology and the Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Preimplantation genetic testing: a Practice Committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2007;88:1497–1504.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Grace J, El Toukhy T, Braude P. Pre-implantation genetic testing. BJOG. 2004;111:1165–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Sampson JE, Ouhibi N, Lawce H, Patton PE, Battaglia DE, Burry KA, et al. The role of preimplantation genetic diagnosis in balanced translocation carriers. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2004;190:1707–13.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Shahine LK, Cedars MI. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis does not increase pregnancy rates in patients at risk for aneuploidy. Fertil Steril. 2006;85:51–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    El-Toukhy T, Khalaf Y, Braude P. IVF results: optimize not maximize. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2006;194:322–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mersereau JE, Pergament E, Zhang X, Milad MP. Preimplantation genetic screening to improve in vitro fertilization pregnancy rates: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Fertil Steril. 2008;90:1287–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Staessen C, Verpoest W, Donoso P, Haentjens P, Van der Els J, Liebaers I, et al. Preimplantation genetic screening does not improve delivery rate in women under the age of 36 following single-embryo transfer. Hum Reprod. 2008;23:2818–25.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Twisk M, Mastenbroek S, van Wely M, Heineman MJ, Van der Veen F, Repping S. Detección genética de preimplantación del número anormal de cromosomas (aneuploides) en la fertilización in vitro o en la inyección intracitoplasmática de espermatozoides (Revisión Cochrane traducida). En: La Biblioteca Cochrane Plus, 2008 Número 4. Oxford: Update Software Ltd. Disponible en: http://www.update-software.com. Traducida de The Cochrane Library, 2008 Issue 3. Chichester: Wiley.
  13. 13.
    Stevens J, Wale P, Surrey ES, Schoolcraft WB. Is aneuploidy screening for patients aged 35 or over beneficial? A prospective randomized trial. [Abstract]. Fertil Steril. 2004;82(Suppl 2):249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Staessen C, Platteau P, Van Assche E, Michiels A, Tournaye H, Camus M, et al. Comparison of blastocyst transfer with or without preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidy screening in couples with advanced maternal age: a prospective randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod. 2004;19:2849–58.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Glanville JM, Lefebvre C, Miles JN, Camosso-Stefinovic J. How to identify randomized controlled trials in MEDLINE: ten years on. J Med Libr Assoc. 2006;94:130–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lowe G, Twaddle S. The Scottish intercollegiate guidelines network (SIGN): an update. Scott Med J. 2005;50:51–2.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Fleiss JL. The statistical basis of meta-analysis. Stat Methods Med Res. 1993;2:121–45.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Donner A, Klar N. The statistical analysis of kappa statistics in multiple samples. J Clin Epidemiol. 1996;49:1053–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Higgins JP, Thompson SG, Deeks JJ, Altman DG. Measuring inconsistency in meta-analyses. BMJ. 2003;327:557–60.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technology, Adamson GD, de Mouzon J, Lancaster P, Nygren KG, Sullivan E, et al. World collaborative report on in vitro fertilization, 2000. Fertil Steril. 2006;85:1586–622.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, Kunz R, Falck-Ytter Y, Alonso-Coello P, et al. GRADE working group. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2008;336(7650):924–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Pogue JM, Yusuf S. Cumulating evidence from randomized trials: utilizing sequential monitoring boundaries for cumulative meta-analysis. Control Clin Trials. 1997;18:580–93.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Zegers-Hochschild F, Nygren KG, Adamson GD, de Mouzon J, Lancaster P, Mansour R. Sullivan E on behalf of the international committee monitoring assisted reproductive technologies. Hum Reprod. 2006;21:1968–70.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Domingo J (principal investigator). ClinicalTrials gov. Identifier NCT00547781. URL:http://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT00547781?rcv_s=10%2F22%2F2007&rank=1.
  25. 25.
    Werlin L, Rodi I, DeCherney A, Marello E, Hill D, Munné S. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis as both a therapeutic and diagnostic tool in assisted reproductive technology. Fertil Steril. 2003;80:467–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Mastenbroek S, Twisk M, van Echten-Arends J, Sikkema-Raddatz B, Korevaar JC, Verhoeve HR, et al. In vitro fertilization with preimplantation genetic screening. N Engl J Med. 2007;357:9–17.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Schoolcraft WB, Katz-Jaffe MG, Stevens J, Rawlins M, Munne S. Preimplantation aneuploidy testing for infertile patients of advanced maternal age: a randomized prospective trial. Fertil Steril. 2008; doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.05.029.
  28. 28.
    Jansen RPS, Bowman MC, de Booer KA, Leigh DA, Lieberman DB, McArthur SJ. What next for preimplantation genetic screening (PGS)? Experience with blastocyst biopsy and testing for aneuploidy. Hum Reprod. 2008;23:1476–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Meyer LR, Klipstein S, Hazlett WD, Nasta T, Mangan P, Karande VC. A prospective randomized controlled trial of preimplantation genetic screening in the “good prognosis” patient. Fertil Steril. 2008; doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.02.162
  30. 30.
    Hardarson T, Hanson C, Lundin K, Hillensjö T, Nilsson L, Stevic J, et al. Preimplantation genetic screening in women of advanced maternal age caused a decrease in clinical pregnancy rate: a randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod. 2008;23:2806–12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Devereaux PJ, Choi PT, El-Dika S, Bhandari M, Montori VM, Schünemann HJ, et al. An observational study found that authors of randomized controlled trials frequently use concealment of randomization and blinding, despite the failure to report these methods. J Clin Epidemiol. 2004;57:1232–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Geicher N, Weghofer A, Barad D. Preimplantation genetic screening: “established” and ready for prime time? Fertil Steril. 2008;89:780–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Gianaroli L, Magli MC, Munné S, Fiorentino A, Montanaro N, Ferraretti AP. Will preimplantation genetic diagnosis assist patients with a poor prognosis to achieve pregnancy? Hum Reprod. 2007;12:1762–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Iwarsson E, Lundqvist M, Inzunza J, Ahrlund-Richter L, Sjöblom P, Lundkvist O, et al. A high degree of aneuploidy in frozen-thawed human preimplantation embryos. Hum Genet. 1999;104:376–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Delhanty JD, Harper JC, Ao A, Handyside AH, Winston RM. Multicolour FISH detects frequent chromosomal mosaicism and chaotic division in normal preimplantation embryos from fertile patients. Hum Genet. 1997;99:755–60.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Lim AS, Goh VH, Su CL, Yu SL. Microscopic assessment of pronuclear embryos is not definitive. Hum Genet. 2000;107:62–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Munné S, Sandalinas M, Escudero T, Velilla E, Walmsley R, Sadowy S, et al. Improved implantation after preimplantation genetic diagnosis of aneuploidy. Reprod Biomed Online. 2003;7:91–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Reis Soares S, Rubio C, Rodrigo L, Simón C, Remohí J, Pellicer A. High frequency of chromosomal abnormalities in embryos obtained from oocyte donation cycles. Fertil Steril. 2003;80:656–67.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Rubio C, Simón C, Vidal F, Rodrigo L, Pehlivan T, Remohí J, et al. Chromosomal abnormalities and embryo development in recurrent miscarriage couples. Hum Reprod. 2003;18:182–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Bahçe M, Cohen J, Munné S. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis of aneuploidy: were we looking at the wrong chromosomes? J Assist Reprod Genet. 1999;16:176–81.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Wells D, Delhanty JD. Comprehensive chromosomal analysis of human preimplantation embryos using whole genome amplification and single cell comparative genomic hybridization. Mol Hum Reprod. 2000;6:1055–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Wells D, Levy B. Cytogenetics in reproductive medicine: the contribution of comparative genomic hybridization (CGH). Bioessays. 2003;25:289–300.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Wilton L, Voullaire L, Sargeant P, Williamson R, McBain J. Preimplantation aneuploidy screening using comparative genomic hybridization or fluorescence in situ hybridization of embryos from patients with recurrent implantation failure. Fertil Steril. 2003;80:860–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Magli MC, Jones GM, Gras L, Gianaroli L, Korman I, Trounson AO. Chromosome mosaicism in day 3 aneuploid embryos that develop to morphologically normal blastocysts in vitro. Hum Reprod. 2000;15:1781–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Li M, DeUgarte CM, Surrey M, Danzer H, DeCherney A, Hill DL. Fluorescence in situ hybridization reanalysis of day-6 human blastocysts diagnosed with aneuploidy on day 3. Fertil Steril. 2005;84:1395–400.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Munné S, Velilla E, Colls P, Garcia Bermudez M, Vemuri MC, Steuerwald N, et al. Self-correction of chromosomally abnormal embryos in culture and implications for stem cell production. Fertil Steril. 2005;84:1328–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Donoso P, Staessen C, Fauser BC, Devroey P. Current value of preimplantation genetic aneuploidy screening in IVF. Hum Reprod Update. 2007;13:15–25.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Coulam CB, Jeyendran RS, Fiddler M, Pergament E. Discordance among blastomeres renders preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidy ineffective. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2007;24:37–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Templeton A, Morris JK. Reducing the risk of multiple births by transfer of two embryos after in vitro fertilization. N Engl J Med. 1998;27:573–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Schieve LA, Peterson HB, Meikle SF, Jeng G, Danel I, Burnett NM, et al. Live-birth rates and multiple-birth risk using in vitro fertilization. JAMA. 1999;282:1832–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Braude P, Flinter F. Use and misuse of preimplantation genetic testing. BMJ. 2007;335:752–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Van Voorhis BJ. Clinical practice. In vitro fertilization. N Engl J Med. 2007;356:379–86.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Mastenbroek S, Scriven P, Twisk M, Viville S, Van der Veen F, Repping S. Ahet next for preimplantation genetic screening? More randomized controlled trials needed? Hum Reprod. 2008;23:2626–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Fritz MA. Perspectives on the efficacy and indications for preimplantation genetic screening: where are we now? Hum Reprod. 2008;23:2617–2621.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Miguel A. Checa
    • 1
  • Pablo Alonso-Coello
    • 2
    • 3
  • Ivan Solà
    • 2
  • Ana Robles
    • 1
  • Ramón Carreras
    • 1
  • Juan Balasch
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Hospital Universitari del MarAutonomous University of BarcelonaBarcelonaSpain
  2. 2.Centro Cochrane Iberoamericano, Servicio de Epidemiología Clínica y Salud Pública, Hospital de la Santa Creu i Sant PauAutonomous University of BarcelonaBarcelonaSpain
  3. 3.CIBER de Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP)BarcelonaSpain
  4. 4.Institut Clínic of Gynecology, Obstetrics and Neonatology, Faculty of Medicine-University of BarcelonaHospital Clínic-Institut d’Investigacions Biomèdiques August Pi i Sunyer (IDIBAPS)BarcelonaSpain

Personalised recommendations