Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Do patients who achieve pregnancy using IVF-PGS do the recommended genetic diagnostic testing in pregnancy?

  • Assisted Reproduction Technologies
  • Published:
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Patients undergoing in-vitro fertilization (IVF) with preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) are counseled about the limitations of this technique. As part of the consent process for PGS, physicians recommend diagnostic genetic testing performed in early pregnancy to definitively rule out chromosomal abnormalities. We have noted anecdotally, however, that few patients undergo the recommended diagnostic testing. In this study, we are examining if women who conceived using IVF-PGS did early pregnancy chromosomal testing, and if they did, what type of testing they had.

Methods

This study was performed from 2015 to 2017 in the Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility at Northwestern University. We included patients who became pregnant after IVF-PGS who were seen by the Division of Reproductive Genetics and non-PGS control group.

Results

Sixty-eight patients were included. A total of 50 patients (73.5%) opted for non-invasive prenatal screening; 5 (7.4%) had invasive testing (4 had chorionic villus sampling and 1 had amniocentesis). A total of 13 patients (19%) declined further genetic testing. When comparing demographic data, the mean age was significantly higher in the group of patients who pursued non-invasive testing than in the group who declined further testing (37.15 vs 34.05 years old, p < 0.05). Control group declined invasive diagnostic testing.

Conclusions

Most patients who conceive using IVF-PGS do not pursue diagnostic prenatal chromosomal testing. Future studies focusing on decision making in this patient group are warranted to further elucidate why a small percentage of patients opt for diagnostic testing, even when adequately counseled about the inherent limitations of PGS.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Munné S, Alikani M, Tomkin G, Grifo J, Cohen J. Embryo morphology, developmental rates, and maternal age are correlated with chromosome abnormalities **Presented at the 50th Annual Meeting of The American Fertility Society, San Antonio, Texas, November 4 to 9, 1994, where it was awarded the prize paper of the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. Fertil Steril. 1995;64(2):382–91. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0015-0282(16)57739-5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Bielanska M, Tan SL, Ao A. Chromosomal mosaicism throughout human implantation development in vitro: incidence, type, and relevance to embryo outcome. Hum Reprod. 2002;17(2):413–9. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/17.2.413.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Munné S, Sandalinas M, Magli C, Gianaroli L, Cohen J, Warburton D. Increased rate of aneuploid embryos in young women with previous aneuploid conceptions. Prenat Diagn. 2004;24(8):638–43. https://doi.org/10.1002/pd.957.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Kuliev A, Cieslak J, Verlinsky Y. Frequency and distribution of chromosome abnormalities in human oocytes. Cytogenet Genome Res. 2005;111(3–4):193–8. https://doi.org/10.1159/000086889.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Magli MC, Gianaroli L, Ferraretti AP, Lappi M, Ruberti A, Farfalli V. Embryo morphology and development are dependent on the chromosomal complement. Fertil Steril. 2007;87(3):534–41. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2006.07.1512.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Munné 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. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1472-6483(10)61057-7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. 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. https://doi.org/10.1097/MOP.0b013e328332c6ab.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Gleicher N, Vidali A, Braverman J, Kushnir VA, Barad DH, Hudson C, et al. Accuracy of preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) is compromised by degree of mosaicism of human embryos. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2016;14(1):54. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12958-016-0193-6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Kokkali G, Traeger-Synodinos J, Vrettou C, Stavrou D, Jones GM, Cram DS, et al. Blastocyst biopsy versus cleavage stage biopsy and blastocyst transfer for preimplantation genetic diagnosis of beta-thalassaemia: a pilot study. Hum Reprod. 2007;22(5):1443–9. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/del506.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Vera-Rodriguez M, Rubio C. Assessing the true incidence of mosaicism in preimplantation embryos. Fertil Steril. 2017;107(5):1107–12. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.03.019.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Paulson RJ. Preimplantation genetic screening: what is the clinical efficiency? Fertil Steril. 2017;108(2):228–30. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.06.023.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Akolekar R, Beta J, Picciarelli G, Ogilvie C, D'Antonio F. Procedure-related risk of miscarriage following amniocentesis and chorionic villus sampling: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015;45(1):16–26. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.14636.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Devers PL, Cronister A, Ormond KE, Facio F, Brasington CK, Flodman P. Noninvasive prenatal testing/noninvasive prenatal diagnosis: the position of the National Society of Genetic Counselors. J Genet Couns. 2013;22(3):291–5. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10897-012-9564-0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Brezina PR, Kutteh WH, Bailey AP, Ke RW. Preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) is an excellent tool, but not perfect: a guide to counseling patients considering PGS. Fertil Steril. 2016;105(1):49–50. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.09.042.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Sills SE, Schattman GL, Veeck LL, Liu H-C, Prasad M, Rosenwaks Z. Characteristics of consecutive in vitro fertilization cycles among patients treated with follicle-stimulationg hormone (FSH) and human menopausal gonadotropin versus FSH alone. Fertil Steril. 1998;69(5):831–5. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(98)00046-6.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Schoolcraft WB, Fragouli E, Stevens J, Munne S, Katz-Jaffe MG, Wells D. Clinical application of comprehensive chromosomal screening at the blastocyst stage. Fertil Steril. 2010;94(5):1700–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.10.015.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Ly KD, Agarwal A, Nagy ZP. Preimplantation genetic screening: does it help or hinder IVF treatment and what is the role of the embryo? J Assist Reprod Genet. 2011;28(9):833–49. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-011-9608-7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. 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. https://doi.org/10.1186/1755-8166-5-24.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Bodurtha J, Strauss JF. Genomics and perinatal care. N Engl J Med. 2012;366(1):64–73. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMra1105043.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Arian S, Westerfield L, Erfani H, Nassef S, Buffie A, Gibbons WE, et al. Genetic screening and testing in pregnancies conceived by in vitro fertilization (IVF) with preimplantation genetic screening (PGS). Fertil Steril. 2017;108(3):e292. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.07.861.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Takyi A, Santolaya-Forgas J. Prenatal screening for chromosomal abnormalities in IVF patients that opted for preimplantation genetic screening/diagnosis (PGS/D): a need for revised algorithms in the era of personalized medicine. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2017;34(6):723–4. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-017-0907-5.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

Supported by the Northwestern Memorial Foundation Evergreen Grant (to MEP) and P50 HD076188 (MEP, PI: T. Woodruff).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Reproductive Science in Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA

    Dana Kimelman

  2. Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, 633 N. St. Clair Ave, Suite 18-027, Chicago, IL, 60611, USA

    Rafael Confino, Edmond Confino, John X. Zhang & Mary Ellen Pavone

  3. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology-Clinical Genetics, Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine, Chicago, IL, USA

    Lee P. Shulman

Authors
  1. Dana Kimelman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rafael Confino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Edmond Confino
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Lee P. Shulman
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. John X. Zhang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Mary Ellen Pavone
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mary Ellen Pavone.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Kimelman, D., Confino, R., Confino, E. et al. Do patients who achieve pregnancy using IVF-PGS do the recommended genetic diagnostic testing in pregnancy?. J Assist Reprod Genet 35, 1881–1885 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-018-1289-z

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-018-1289-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation