Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics

, Volume 32, Issue 3, pp 435–444 | Cite as

In vitro fertilization with preimplantation genetic screening improves implantation and live birth in women age 40 through 43

  • Hsiao-Ling Lee
  • David H. McCulloh
  • Brooke Hodes-Wertz
  • Alexis Adler
  • Caroline McCaffrey
  • James A. Grifo
Assisted Reproduction Technologies

Abstract

Purpose

In Vitro Fertilization is an effective treatment for infertility; however, it has relatively low success in women of advanced maternal age (>37) who have a high risk of producing aneuploid embryos, resulting in implantation failure, a higher rate of miscarriage or birth of a child with chromosome abnormalities. The purpose of this study was to compare the implantation, miscarriage and live birth rates with and without preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) of embryos from patients aged 40 through 43 years.

Methods

This is a retrospective cohort study, comparing embryos screened for ploidy using trophectoderm biopsy and array comparative genomic hybridization to embryos that were not screened. We compared pregnancy outcomes for traditional fresh IVF cycles with day 5 embryo transfers, Frozen Embryo Transfer (FET) cycles without PGS and PGS-FET (FET of only euploid embryos) cycles of patients with maternal ages ranging from 40 to 43 years, undergoing oocyte retrievals during the period between 1/1/2011 and 12/31/2012.

Results

The implantation rate of euploid embryos transferred in FET cycles (50.9 %) was significantly greater than for unscreened embryos transferred in either fresh (23.8 %) or FET (25.4 %) cycles. The incidence of live birth per transferred embryo for PGS-FET (45.5 %) was significantly greater than for No PGS fresh (15.8 %) or No PGS FET (19.0 %) cycles. The incidences of live birth per implanted sac for PGS FET cycles (89.3 %), No PGS fresh cycles (66.7 %) and No PGS FET cycles (75.0 %) were not significantly different.

Conclusions

The present data provides evidence of the benefits of PGS with regard to improved implantation and live birth rate per embryo transferred.

Keywords

Advanced maternal age Comparative genomic hybridization Frozen embryo transfer Implantation Trophectoderm biopsy 

References

  1. 1.
    Munne S, Alikani M, Tomkin G, Grifo J, Cohen J. Embryo morphology, developmental rates, and maternal age are correlated with chromosome abnormalities. Fertil Steril. 1995;64(2):382–91.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hassold T, Hunt P. Maternal age and chromosomally abnormal pregnancies: what we know and what we wish we knew. Curr Opin Pediatr. 2009;21(6):703–8.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Harton GL, Munne S, Surrey M, Grifo J, Kaplan B, McCulloh DH, et al. Diminished effect of maternal age on implantation after preimplantation genetic diagnosis with array comparative genomic hybridization. Fertil Steril. 2013;100(6):1695–703.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hassold TJ, Matsuyama A, Newlands IM, Matsuura JS, Jacobs PA, Manuel B, et al. A cytogenetic study of spontaneous abortions in Hawaii. Ann Hum Genet. 1978;41(4):443–54.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Marquard K, Westphal LM, Milki AA, Lathi RB. Etiology of recurrent pregnancy loss in women over the age of 35 years. Fertil Steril. 2010;94(4):1473–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Stephenson MD, Awartani KA, Robinson WP. Cytogenetic analysis of miscarriages from couples with recurrent miscarriage: a case–control study. Hum Reprod. 2002;17(2):446–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Werner M, Reh A, Grifo J, Perle MA. Characteristics of chromosomal abnormalities diagnosed after spontaneous abortions in an infertile population. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2012;29(8):817–20.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Munne S, Chen S, Colls P, Garrisi J, Zheng X, Cekleniak N, et al. Maternal age, morphology, development and chromosome abnormalities in over 6000 cleavage-stage embryos. Reprod Biomed Online. 2007;14(5):628–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Rubio C, Rodrigo L, Mercader A, Mateu E, Buendia P, Pehlivan T, et al. Impact of chromosomal abnormalities on preimplantation embryo development. Prenat Diagn. 2007;27(8):748–56.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sandalinas M, Sadowy S, Alikani M, Calderon G, Cohen J, Munne S. Developmental ability of chromosomally abnormal human embryos to develop to the blastocyst stage. Hum Reprod. 2001;16(9):1954–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    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(8):1781–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Marquez C, Sandalinas M, Bahce M, Alikani M, Munne S. Chromosome abnormalities in 1255 cleavage-stage human embryos. Reprod Biomed Online. 2000;1(1):17–26.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Alfarawati S, Fragouli E, Colls P, Stevens J, Gutierrez-Mateo C, Schoolcraft WB, et al. The relationship between blastocyst morphology, chromosomal abnormality, and embryo gender. Fertil Steril. 2011;95(2):520–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yang Z, Liu J, Collins GS, Salem SA, Liu X, Lyle SS, et al. Selection of single blastocysts for fresh transfer via standard morphology assessment alone and with array CGH for good prognosis IVF patients: results from a randomized pilot study. Mol Cytogenet. 2012;5(1):24.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kramer YG, Kofinas JD, Melzer K, Noyes N, McCaffrey C, Buldo-Licciardi J, et al. Assessing morphokinetic parameters via time lapse microscopy (TLM) to predict euploidy: are aneuploidy risk classification models universal? Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics. 2014. PubMed PMID: 24962789.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Rubio C, Bellver J, Rodrigo L, Bosch E, Mercader A, Vidal C, et al. Preimplantation genetic screening using fluorescence in situ hybridization in patients with repetitive implantation failure and advanced maternal age: two randomized trials. Fertil Steril. 2013;99(5):1400–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    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. 2009;92(1):157–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Munne S, Chen S, Fischer J, Colls P, Zheng X, Stevens J, et al. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis reduces pregnancy loss in women aged 35 years and older with a history of recurrent miscarriages. Fertil Steril. 2005;84(2):331–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Scott Jr RT, Ferry K, Su J, Tao X, Scott K, Treff NR. Comprehensive chromosome screening is highly predictive of the reproductive potential of human embryos: a prospective, blinded, nonselection study. Fertil Steril. 2012;97(4):870–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Grifo JA, Hodes-Wertz B, Lee HL, Amperloquio E, Clarke-Williams M, Adler A. Single thawed euploid embryo transfer improves IVF pregnancy, miscarriage, and multiple gestation outcomes and has similar implantation rates as egg donation. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2013;30(2):259–64.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Platteau P, Staessen C, Michiels A, Van Steirteghem A, Liebaers I, Devroey P. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidy screening in women older than 37 years. Fertil Steril. 2005;84(2):319–24.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Palermo GD, Schlegel PN, Sills ES, Veeck LL, Zaninovic N, Menendez S, et al. Births after intracytoplasmic injection of sperm obtained by testicular extraction from men with nonmosaic Klinefelter’s syndrome. N Engl J Med. 1998;338(9):588–90.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Keegan BR, Barton S, Sanchez X, Berkeley AS, Krey LC, Grifo J. Isolated teratozoospermia does not affect in vitro fertilization outcome and is not an indication for intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Fertil Steril. 2007;88(6):1583–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Grifo JA, Flisser E, Adler A, McCaffrey C, Krey LC, Licciardi F, et al. Programmatic implementation of blastocyst transfer in a university-based in vitro fertilization clinic: maximizing pregnancy rates and minimizing triplet rates. Fertil Steril. 2007;88(2):294–300.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Gardner DK, Lane M. Culture and selection of viable blastocysts: a feasible proposition for human IVF? Hum Reprod Update. 1997;3(4):367–82.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Adler A, Lee HL, McCulloh DH, Ampeloquio E, Clarke-Williams M, Wertz BH, et al. Blastocyst culture selects for euploid embryos: comparison of blastomere and trophectoderm biopsies. Reprod Biomed Online. 2014;28(4):485–91.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Ata B, Kaplan B, Danzer H, Glassner M, Opsahl M, Tan SL, et al. Array CGH analysis shows that aneuploidy is not related to the number of embryos generated. Reprod Biomed Online. 2012;24(6):614–20.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Schoolcraft WB, Treff NR, Stevens JM, Ferry K, Katz-Jaffe M, Scott Jr RT. Live birth outcome with trophectoderm biopsy, blastocyst vitrification, and single-nucleotide polymorphism microarray-based comprehensive chromosome screening in infertile patients. Fertil Steril. 2011;96(3):638–40.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Shapiro BS, Daneshmand ST, Garner FC, Aguirre M, Hudson C, Thomas S. Evidence of impaired endometrial receptivity after ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: a prospective randomized trial comparing fresh and frozen-thawed embryo transfer in normal responders. Fertil Steril. 2011;96(2):344–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Hodes-Wertz B, Grifo J, Ghadir S, Kaplan B, Laskin CA, Glassner M, et al. Idiopathic recurrent miscarriage is caused mostly by aneuploid embryos. Fertil Steril. 2012;98(3):675–80.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Elsner CW, Tucker MJ, Sweitzer CL, Brockman WD, Morton PC, Wright G, et al. Multiple pregnancy rate and embryo number transferred during in vitro fertilization. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1997;177(2):350–5. discussion 5–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Reynolds MA, Schieve LA, Jeng G, Peterson HB, Wilcox LS. Risk of multiple birth associated with in vitro fertilization using donor eggs. Am J Epidemiol. 2001;154(11):1043–50.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hsiao-Ling Lee
    • 1
  • David H. McCulloh
    • 1
  • Brooke Hodes-Wertz
    • 1
  • Alexis Adler
    • 1
  • Caroline McCaffrey
    • 1
  • James A. Grifo
    • 1
  1. 1.New York University Langone Medical Center, NYU Fertility CenterNew YorkUSA

Personalised recommendations