Semin Reprod Med 2012; 30(04): 309-322
DOI: 10.1055/s-0032-1313910
Thieme Medical Publishers 333 Seventh Avenue, New York, NY 10001, USA.

Clinical Management of in Vitro Fertilization with Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis

Ilan Tur-Kaspa
1   Institute for Human Reproduction (IHR)
2   Clinical IVF-PGD Program, Reproductive Genetics Institute
3   Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois
› Author Affiliations
Further Information

Publication History

Publication Date:
21 June 2012 (online)

Abstract

Patients who undergo in vitro fertilization (IVF) because of preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) require different clinical management than those who come in because of infertility alone. PGD adds a “fourth dimension” to the emotional aspect of a patients' assisted reproductive technology treatment. It significantly decreases the number of embryos available for transfer by 25 to 81%, and therefore ovarian stimulation for IVF with PGD should be tailored individually, taking into account patients' safety and estimated ovarian reserve. Recent studies showed that with increased number of oocytes retrieved, the higher the chance to have an embryo transfer and normal cryopreserved blastocysts. With adequate ovarian stimulation, there is no cutoff for the numbers of oocytes/embryos needed to start PGD with, especially for younger patients. Patient-friendly protocols, such as those based on gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist and vaginal progesterone support may be used. Elective single embryo transfer and blastocysts cryopreservation to avoid multiple pregnancies may be offered with PGD. The benefit of adding preimplantation genetic screening to IVF treatment is still controversial, and evidence-based data on 24-chromosome testing of polar bodies or trophectoderm is needed before it may be implemented into routine patient care.

This review discusses the clinical management of IVF with PGD based on the best available data and my personal clinical experience as a reproductive specialist with >1000 IVF/intracytoplasmic sperm injection-PGD cycles. The information provided here will assist reproductive specialists, nurses, geneticists, genetic counselors, and embryologists to better counsel and treat couples who wish to conceive with a healthy child through IVF with PGD. It is time for PGD to be viewed as a modern modality of preventive medicine. As such, it should be incorporated into national health-care systems and be covered by medical insurance.

 
  • References

  • 1 American Medical Association. Prenatal Genetic Screening. CEJA Report D–I-92. Available at: www.ama-assn.org/resources/doc/code-medical-ethics/211a.pdf . Accessed July 14, 2011
  • 2 Practice Committee of Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology; Practice Committee of American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Preimplantation genetic testing: a Practice Committee opinion. Fertil Steril 2008; 90 (5, Suppl) S136-S143
  • 3 Soini S, Ibarreta D, Anastasiadou V , et al; ESHG; ESHRE. The interface between assisted reproductive technologies and genetics: technical, social, ethical and legal issues. Eur J Hum Genet 2006; 14 (5) 588-645
  • 4 Handyside AH. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis after 20 years. Reprod Biomed Online 2010; 21 (3) 280-282
  • 5 Tur-Kaspa I, Aljadeff G, Rechitsky S, Grotjan HE, Verlinsky Y. PGD for all cystic fibrosis carrier couples: novel strategy for preventive medicine and cost analysis. Reprod Biomed Online 2010; 21 (2) 186-195
  • 6 Verlinsky Y, Tur-Kaspa I, Cieslak J , et al. Preimplantation testing for chromosomal disorders improves reproductive outcome of poor-prognosis patients. Reprod Biomed Online 2005; 11 (2) 219-225
  • 7 Otani T, Roche M, Mizuike M, Colls P, Escudero T, Munné S. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis significantly improves the pregnancy outcome of translocation carriers with a history of recurrent miscarriage and unsuccessful pregnancies. Reprod Biomed Online 2006; 13 (6) 869-874
  • 8 Fischer J, Colls P, Escudero T, Munné S. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) improves pregnancy outcome for translocation carriers with a history of recurrent losses. Fertil Steril 2010; 94 (1) 283-289
  • 9 Keymolen K, Staessen C, Verpoest W , et al. A proposal for reproductive counselling in carriers of Robertsonian translocations: 10 years of experience with preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Hum Reprod 2009; 24 (9) 2365-2371
  • 10 Fiorentino F, Kokkali G, Biricik A , et al. Polymerase chain reaction-based detection of chromosomal imbalances on embryos: the evolution of preimplantation genetic diagnosis for chromosomal translocations. Fertil Steril 2010; 94 (6) 2001-2011 , 2011, e1–e6
  • 11 Harton G, Braude P, Lashwood A , et al; European Society for Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) PGD Consortium. ESHRE PGD consortium best practice guidelines for organization of a PGD centre for PGD/preimplantation genetic screening. Hum Reprod 2011; 26 (1) 14-24
  • 12 Audibert F, Wilson RD, Allen V , et al; Genetics Committee. Preimplantation genetic testing. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2009; 31 (8) 761-775
  • 13 Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis International Society (PGDIS). Guidelines for good practice in PGD: programme requirements and laboratory quality assurance. Reprod Biomed Online 2008; 16 (1) 134-147
  • 14 Musters AM, Twisk M, Leschot NJ , et al. Perspectives of couples with high risk of transmitting genetic disorders. Fertil Steril 2010; 94 (4) 1239-1243
  • 15 Verlinsky Y, Ginsberg N, Lifchez A, Valle J, Moise J, Strom CM. Analysis of the first polar body: preconception genetic diagnosis. Hum Reprod 1990; 5 (7) 826-829
  • 16 Handyside AH, Kontogianni EH, Hardy K, Winston RM. Pregnancies from biopsied human preimplantation embryos sexed by Y-specific DNA amplification. Nature 1990; 344 (6268) 768-770
  • 17 Twisk M, Haadsma ML, van der Veen F , et al. Preimplantation genetic screening as an alternative to prenatal testing for Down syndrome: preferences of women undergoing in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection treatment. Fertil Steril 2007; 88 (4) 804-810
  • 18 Wilton L. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis and chromosome analysis of blastomeres using comparative genomic hybridization. Hum Reprod Update 2005; 11 (1) 33-41
  • 19 Shahine LK, Cedars MI. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis does not increase pregnancy rates in patients at risk for aneuploidy. Fertil Steril 2006; 85 (1) 51-56
  • 20 Anderson RA, Pickering S. The current status of preimplantation genetic screening: British Fertility Society Policy and Practice Guidelines. Hum Fertil (Camb) 2008; 11 (2) 71-75
  • 21 Gleicher N, Weghofer A, Barad D. Preimplantation genetic screening: “established” and ready for prime time?. Fertil Steril 2008; 89 (4) 780-788
  • 22 Basille C, Frydman R, El Aly A , et al. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis: state of the art. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2009; 145 (1) 9-13
  • 23 Harper J, Coonen E, De Rycke M , et al. What next for preimplantation genetic screening (PGS)? A position statement from the ESHRE PGD Consortium Steering Committee. Hum Reprod 2010; 25 (4) 821-823
  • 24 Harper JC, Harton G. The use of arrays in preimplantation genetic diagnosis and screening. Fertil Steril 2010; 94 (4) 1173-1177
  • 25 Munné S, Wells D, Cohen J. Technology requirements for preimplantation genetic diagnosis to improve assisted reproduction outcomes. Fertil Steril 2010; 94 (2) 408-430
  • 26 Schoolcraft WB, Fragouli E, Stevens J, Munné S, Katz-Jaffe MG, Wells D. Clinical application of comprehensive chromosomal screening at the blastocyst stage. Fertil Steril 2010; 94 (5) 1700-1706
  • 27 Schoolcraft WB, Treff NR, Stevens KF, Ferry K, Katz-Jaffe M, Scott Jr RT. Live birth outcome with trophectoderm biopsy, blastocyst vitrification, and single-nucleotide polymorphism microarray–based comprehensive. Fertil Steril 2011; 96 (3) 638-640
  • 28 Scott Jr RT, Tao X, Taylor D, Ferry KM, Treff NR. A prospective randomized controlled trial demonstrating significantly increased clinical pregnancy rates following 24 chromosome aneuploidy screening: biopsy and analysis on day 5 with fresh transfer. Fertil Steril 2010; 94 (Suppl) S2
  • 29 Hershberger PE, Schoenfeld C, Tur-Kaspa I. Unraveling preimplantation genetic diagnosis for couples at high-genetic-risk: applications, procedures, and implications for nurses at the front line of care. Nurs Womens Health 2011; 15: 36-45
  • 30 Cohen J, Wells D, Munné S. Removal of 2 cells from cleavage stage embryos is likely to reduce the efficacy of chromosomal tests that are used to enhance implantation rates. Fertil Steril 2007; 87 (3) 496-503
  • 31 Goossens V, De Rycke M, De Vos A , et al. Diagnostic efficiency, embryonic development and clinical outcome after the biopsy of one or two blastomeres for preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Hum Reprod 2008; 23 (3) 481-492
  • 32 De Vos A, Staessen C, De Rycke M , et al. Impact of cleavage-stage embryo biopsy in view of PGD on human blastocyst implantation: a prospective cohort of single embryo transfers. Hum Reprod 2009; 24 (12) 2988-2996
  • 33 Munné S, Gianaroli L, Tur-Kaspa I , et al. Substandard application of preimplantation genetic screening may interfere with its clinical success. Fertil Steril 2007; 88 (4) 781-784
  • 34 Mastenbroek S, Twisk M, van Echten-Arends J , et al. In vitro fertilization with preimplantation genetic screening. N Engl J Med 2007; 357 (1) 9-17
  • 35 Cohen J, Grifo JA. Multicentre trial of preimplantation genetic screening reported in the New England Journal of Medicine: an in-depth look at the findings. Reprod Biomed Online 2007; 15 (4) 365-366
  • 36 Magli MC, Gianaroli L, Ferraretti AP, Toschi M, Esposito F, Fasolino MC. The combination of polar body and embryo biopsy does not affect embryo viability. Hum Reprod 2004; 19 (5) 1163-1169
  • 37 Cieslak-Janzen J, Tur-Kaspa I, Ilkevitch Y, Bernal A, Morris R, Verlinsky Y. Multiple micromanipulations for PGD does not affect embryo development to blastocyst. Fertil Steril 2006; 85: 1826-1829
  • 38 Verpoest W, Van Landuyt L, Desmyttere S, Cremers A, Devroey P, Liebaers I. The incidence of monozygotic twinning following PGD is not increased. Hum Reprod 2009; 24 (11) 2945-2950
  • 39 Harton GL, Magli MC, Lundin K, Montag M, Lemmen J, Harper JC ; European Society for Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) PGD Consortium/Embryology Special Interest Group. ESHRE PGD Consortium/Embryology Special Interest Group—best practice guidelines for polar body and embryo biopsy for preimplantation genetic diagnosis/screening (PGD/PGS). Hum Reprod 2011; 26 (1) 41-46
  • 40 Cho YJ, Kim JY, Song IO , et al. Does blastomere biopsy in preimplantation genetic diagnosis affect early serum β-hCG levels?. Clin Exp Reprod Med 2011; 38 (1) 31-36
  • 41 Marshall SL, Liu M, Talebian S, Salas J, Keegan D, Grifo J. Day 28 β-hCG values of viable pregnancies from biopsied embryos for preimplantation genetic diagnosis and screening (PGDS) are lower than viable pregnancies from non-biopsied embryos. Fertil Steril 2008; 90 (Suppl) S124
  • 42 Tur-Kaspa I, Confino E, Dudkiewicz AB, Myers SA, Friberg J, Gleicher N. Ovarian stimulation protocol for in vitro fertilization with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist widens the implantation window. Fertil Steril 1990; 53 (5) 859-864
  • 43 Harper JC, de Die-Smulders C, Goossens V , et al. ESHRE PGD consortium data collection VII: cycles from January to December 2004 with pregnancy follow-up to October 2005. Hum Reprod 2008; 23 (4) 741-755
  • 44 Harper JC, Coonen E, De Rycke M , et al. ESHRE PGD Consortium data collection X: cycles from January to December 2007 with pregnancy follow-up to October 2008. Hum Reprod 2010; 25 (11) 2685-2707
  • 45 Grifo J, Talebian S, Keegan D, Krey L, Adler A, Berkeley A. Ten-year experience with preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) at the New York University School of Medicine Fertility Center. Fertil Steril 2007; 88 (4) 978-981
  • 46 Tur-Kaspa I, Bernal A, Tkachenko N, Pawlovska J, Rechitsky S, Verlinsky Y. To PGD or not to PGD: is there a magic number of oocytes to start with?. Fertil Steril 2007; 88 (Suppl. 01) S231-S232
  • 47 Tur-Kaspa I. Clinical outcome of PGD. Reprod Biomed Online 2008; 16 (Suppl. 03) S13
  • 48 Donoso P, Verpoest W, Papanikolaou EG , et al. Single embryo transfer in preimplantation genetic diagnosis cycles for women <36 years does not reduce delivery rate. Hum Reprod 2007; 22 (4) 1021-1025
  • 49 Verpoest W, Haentjens P, De Rycke M , et al. Cumulative reproductive outcome after preimplantation genetic diagnosis: a report on 1498 couples. Hum Reprod 2009; 24 (11) 2951-2959
  • 50 Grace J, El-Toukhy T, Scriven P , et al. Three hundred and thirty cycles of preimplantation genetic diagnosis for serious genetic disease: clinical considerations affecting outcome. BJOG 2006; 113 (12) 1393-1401
  • 51 Feyereisen E, Steffann J, Romana S , et al. Five years' experience of preimplantation genetic diagnosis in the Parisian Center: outcome of the first 441 started cycles. Fertil Steril 2007; 87 (1) 60-73
  • 52 Owen CM, Segars Jr JH. Imprinting disorders and assisted reproductive technology. Semin Reprod Med 2009; 27 (5) 417-428
  • 53 Goossens V, Harton G, Moutou C , et al; European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology PGD Consortium. ESHRE PGD Consortium data collection VIII: cycles from January to December 2005 with pregnancy follow-up to October 2006. Hum Reprod 2008; 23 (12) 2629-2645
  • 54 Simpson JL. Children born after preimplantation genetic diagnosis show no increase in congenital anomalies. Hum Reprod 2010; 25 (1) 6-8
  • 55 Strom CM, Levin R, Strom S, Masciangelo C, Kuliev A, Verlinsky Y. Neonatal outcome of preimplantation genetic diagnosis by polar body removal: the first 109 infants. Pediatrics 2000; 106 (4) 650-653
  • 56 Tur-Kaspa I, Horwitz A, Ginsberg N, Cieslak J, Rechitsky S, Verlinsky Y. Clinical outcome of PGD. Fertil Steril 2005; 84 (Suppl. 01) S99
  • 57 Banerjee I, Shevlin M, Taranissi M , et al. Health of children conceived after preimplantation genetic diagnosis: a preliminary outcome study. Reprod Biomed Online 2008; 16 (3) 376-381
  • 58 Nekkebroeck J, Bonduelle M, Desmyttere S, Van den Broeck W, Ponjaert-Kristoffersen I. Mental and psychomotor development of 2-year-old children born after preimplantation genetic diagnosis/screening. Hum Reprod 2008; 23 (7) 1560-1566
  • 59 Nekkebroeck J, Bonduelle M, Desmyttere S, Van den Broeck W, Ponjaert-Kristoffersen I. Socio-emotional and language development of 2-year-old children born after PGD/PGS, and parental well-being. Hum Reprod 2008; 23 (8) 1849-1857
  • 60 Liebaers I, Desmyttere S, Verpoest W , et al. Report on a consecutive series of 581 children born after blastomere biopsy for preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Hum Reprod 2010; 25 (1) 275-282
  • 61 Rimm AA, Katayama AC, Katayama KP. A meta-analysis of the impact of IVF and ICSI on major malformations after adjusting for the effect of subfertility. J Assist Reprod Genet 2011; 28 (8) 699-705
  • 62 Desmyttere S, De Schepper J, Nekkebroeck J , et al. Two-year auxological and medical outcome of singletons born after embryo biopsy applied in preimplantation genetic diagnosis or preimplantation genetic screening. Hum Reprod 2009; 24 (2) 470-476
  • 63 Middelburg KJ, van der Heide M, Houtzager B , et al; PGS Follow-up Study Group. Mental, psychomotor, neurologic, and behavioral outcomes of 2-year-old children born after preimplantation genetic screening: follow-up of a randomized controlled trial. Fertil Steril 2011; 96 (1) 165-169
  • 64 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, American Society for Reproductive Medicine, Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. 2006 Assisted Reproductive Technology Success Rates: National Summary and Fertility Clinic Reports, Appendix C. Atlanta, GA: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; 2008. . Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/ART/ART2006/508PDF/2006ART.pdf . Accessed July 18, 2011
  • 65 Tur-Kaspa I. The management of poor responder for IVF with PGD. Reprod Biomed Online 2010; 20 (Suppl. 01) S10
  • 66 Garrisi J, Chen SH, Cekleniak NA, Garrisi MG, Cohen J, Munné S. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) is indicated for recurrent miscarriage even in cycles producing five or fewer embryos. Fertil Steril 2006; 86 (Suppl) S58-S59
  • 67 Verpoest W, Seneca S, De Rademaeker M , et al. The reproductive outcome of female patients with myotonic dystrophy type 1 (DM1) undergoing PGD is not affected by the size of the expanded CTG repeat tract. J Assist Reprod Genet 2010; 27 (6) 327-333
  • 68 Figueira RdeC, Braga DP, Setti AS, Iaconelli Jr A, Borges Jr E. Morphological nuclear integrity of sperm cells is associated with preimplantation genetic aneuploidy screening cycle outcomes. Fertil Steril 2011; 95 (3) 990-993
  • 69 Tur-Kaspa I. Optimizing ovarian stimulation for IVF with PGD. Reprod Biomed Online 2008; 16 (Suppl) S22-S23
  • 70 Nardo LG, Fleming R, Howles CM , et al. Conventional ovarian stimulation no longer exists: welcome to the age of individualized ovarian stimulation. Reprod Biomed Online 2011; 23 (2) 141-148
  • 71 Yates AP, Rustamov O, Roberts SA , et al. Anti-Mullerian hormone-tailored stimulation protocols improve outcomes whilst reducing adverse effects and costs of IVF. Hum Reprod 2012; 27 (20) 629
  • 72 Tur-Kaspa I, Gal M, Hartman M, Hartman J, Hartman A. A prospective evaluation of uterine abnormalities by saline infusion sonohysterography in 1,009 women with infertility or abnormal uterine bleeding. Fertil Steril 2006; 86 (6) 1731-1735
  • 73 Fatemi HM, Kasius JC, Timmermans A , et al. Prevalence of unsuspected uterine cavity abnormalities diagnosed by office hysteroscopy prior to in vitro fertilization. Hum Reprod 2010; 25 (8) 1959-1965
  • 74 Karayalcin R, Ozcan S, Moraloglu O, Ozyer S, Mollamahmutoglu L, Batıoglu S. Results of 2500 office-based diagnostic hysteroscopies before IVF. Reprod Biomed Online 2010; 20 (5) 689-693
  • 75 Summers MC, Foland AD. Quantitative decision-making in preimplantation genetic (aneuploidy) screening (PGS). J Assist Reprod Genet 2009; 26 (9–10) 487-502
  • 76 Sunkara SK, Rittenberg V, Raine-Fenning N, Bhattacharya S, Zamora J, Coomarasamy A. Association between the number of eggs and live birth in IVF treatment: an analysis of 400, 135 treatment cycles. Hum Reprod 2011; 26 (7) 1768-1774
  • 77 van der Gaasta MH, Eijkemansb MJC, van der Netb JB , et al. Optimum number of oocytes for a successful first IVF treatment cycle. Reprod BioMed Online 2006; 13: 476-480
  • 78 Revelli A, Casano S, Salvagno F, Delle Piane L. Milder is better? Advantages and disadvantages of “mild” ovarian stimulation for human in vitro fertilization. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2011; 9: 25
  • 79 Vandervorst M, Liebaers I, Sermon K , et al. Successful preimplantation genetic diagnosis is related to the number of available cumulus-oocyte complexes. Hum Reprod 1998; 13 (11) 3169-3176
  • 80 Unal S, Yelke H, Altin G, Candan ZN, Kumtepe Y, Kahraman S. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) results with respect to number of MII oocyte. Fertil Steril 2009; 92 (Suppl) S202
  • 81 Devroey P, Aboulghar M, Garcia-Velasco J , et al. Improving the patient's experience of IVF/ICSI: a proposal for an ovarian stimulation protocol with GnRH antagonist co-treatment. Hum Reprod 2009; 24 (4) 764-774
  • 82 Tur-Kaspa I, Ezcurra D. GnRH antagonist, cetrorelix, for pituitary suppression in modern, patient-friendly assisted reproductive technology. Expert Opin Drug Metab Toxicol 2009; 5 (10) 1323-1336
  • 83 Munné S, Magli C, Adler A , et al. Treatment-related chromosome abnormalities in human embryos. Hum Reprod 1997; 12 (4) 780-784
  • 84 Elbling L, Colot M. Abnormal development and transport and increased sister-chromatid exchange in preimplantation embryos following superovulation in mice. Mutat Res 1985; 147 (4) 189-195
  • 85 Roberts R, Iatropoulou A, Ciantar D , et al. Follicle-stimulating hormone affects metaphase I chromosome alignment and increases aneuploidy in mouse oocytes matured in vitro. Biol Reprod 2005; 72 (1) 107-118
  • 86 Weghofer A, Munné S, Brannath W , et al. The impact of LH-containing gonadotropin stimulation on euploidy rates in preimplantation embryos: antagonist cycles. Fertil Steril 2009; 92 (3) 937-942
  • 87 Baart EB, Martini E, Eijkemans MJ , et al. Milder ovarian stimulation for in-vitro fertilization reduces aneuploidy in the human preimplantation embryo: a randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod 2007; 22 (4) 980-988
  • 88 Tur-Kaspa I, Beneral A, Tkachenko A, Kuliev A, Zlatopolsky A, Verlinsky Y. Does ovarian stimulation protocol for IVF and number of oocytes retrieved affect embryos' aneuploidy rate?. Fertil Steril 2008; 90 (Suppl) S382
  • 89 Kyrou D, Verpoest W, Staessen C , et al. No relationship between the type of pituitary suppression for IVF and chromosomal abnormality rates of blastomeres: an observational study. Fertil Steril 2011; 95 (2) 563-567
  • 90 Gianaroli L, Magli MC, Cavallini G , et al. Predicting aneuploidy in human oocytes: key factors which affect the meiotic process. Hum Reprod 2010; 25 (9) 2374-2386
  • 91 Weghofer A, Barad D, Li J, Gleicher N. Aneuploidy rates in embryos from women with prematurely declining ovarian function: a pilot study. Fertil Steril 2007; 88 (1) 90-94
  • 92 Setti AS, de Almeida Ferreira Braga DP, de Cássia Savio Figueira R, de Castro Azevedo M, Iaconelli Jr A, Borges Jr E. Are poor responders patients at higher risk for producing aneuploid embryos in vitro?. J Assist Reprod Genet 2011; 28 (5) 399-404
  • 93 Kyrou D, Verpoest W, Van der Elst J, Haentjens P, Devroey P, Liebaers I. The influence of age on reproductive outcome in preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD). Fertil Steril 2008; 90: S305
  • 94 Massie JA, Shahine LK, Milki AA, Westphal LM, Lathi RB. Ovarian stimulation and the risk of aneuploid conceptions. Fertil Steril 2011; 95 (3) 970-972
  • 95 Martin RH. Meiotic errors in human oogenesis and spermatogenesis. Reprod Biomed Online 2008; 16 (4) 523-531
  • 96 Munné S, Ary J, Zouves C , et al. Wide range of chromosome abnormalities in the embryos of young egg donors. Reprod Biomed Online 2006; 12 (3) 340-346
  • 97 Verpoest W, Fauser BC, Papanikolaou E , et al. Chromosomal aneuploidy in embryos conceived with unstimulated cycle IVF. Hum Reprod 2008; 23 (10) 2369-2371
  • 98 Kuliev A, Rechitsky S, Laziuk K, Verlinsky O, Tur-Kaspa I, Verlinsky Y. Pre-embryonic diagnosis for Sandhoff disease. Reprod Biomed Online 2006; 12 (3) 328-333
  • 99 Altarescu G, Renbaum P, Brooks P B , et al. Successful polar body-based preimplantation genetic diagnosis for achondroplasia. Reprod Biomed Online 2008; 16 (2) 276-282
  • 100 Lie Fong S, Baart EB, Martini E , et al. Anti-Müllerian hormone: a marker for oocyte quantity, oocyte quality and embryo quality?. Reprod Biomed Online 2008; 16 (5) 664-670
  • 101 Platteau P, Sermon K, Seneca S, Van Steirteghem A, Devroey P, Liebaers I. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis for fragile Xa syndrome: difficult but not impossible. Hum Reprod 2002; 17 (11) 2807-2812
  • 102 Feyereisen E, Amar A, Kerbrat V , et al. Myotonic dystrophy: does it affect ovarian follicular status and responsiveness to controlled ovarian stimulation?. Hum Reprod 2006; 21 (1) 175-182
  • 103 Sagel J, Distiller LA, Morley JE, Isaacs H, Kay G, Van Der Walt A. Myotonia dystrophica: studies on gonadal function using luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LRH). J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1975; 40 (6) 1110-1113
  • 104 Harper P. Myotonic dystrophy and other autosomal muscular dystrophies. In: Scriver CR, Beaudet AL, Sly WS, Valle D, eds. The Metabolic and Molecular Basis of Inherited Disease. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 1995: 4227-4253
  • 105 Sahu B, Ozturk O, Deo N, Fordham K, Ranierri M, Serhal P. Response to controlled ovarian stimulation and oocyte quality in women with myotonic dystrophy type I. J Assist Reprod Genet 2008; 25 (1) 1-5
  • 106 Verpoest W, De Rademaeker M, Sermon K , et al. Real and expected delivery rates of patients with myotonic dystrophy undergoing intracytoplasmic sperm injection and preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Hum Reprod 2008; 23 (7) 1654-1660
  • 107 Verpoest W, Seneca S, De Rademaeker M , et al. The reproductive outcome of female patients with myotonic dystrophy type 1 (DM1) undergoing PGD is not affected by the size of the expanded CTG repeat tract. J Assist Reprod Genet 2010; 27 (6) 327-333
  • 108 Chen SH, Escudero T, Cekleniak NA, Sable DB, Garrisi MG, Munné S. Patterns of ovarian response to gonadotropin stimulation in female carriers of balanced translocation. Fertil Steril 2005; 83 (5) 1504-1509
  • 109 Benner A, Pen R, Siegel A, Kittai A, Kearns WG. Do female balanced translocations influence ovarian response pattern to controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) in preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD)?. Fertil Steril 2009; 92 (Suppl) S200
  • 110 Gelbaya TA, Tsoumpou I, Nardo LG. The likelihood of live birth and multiple birth after single versus double embryo transfer at the cleavage stage: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril 2010; 94 (3) 936-945
  • 111 McLernon DJ, Harrild K, Bergh C , et al. Clinical effectiveness of elective single versus double embryo transfer: meta-analysis of individual patient data from randomised trials. BMJ 2010; 341: c6945
  • 112 Tur-Kaspa I, Cieslak J, Ilkevitch Y, Bernal A, Rechitsky S, Verlinsky Y. The fate of frozen/thawed embryos derived from cycles with preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Fertil Steril 2004; 82 (Suppl. 02) S254-S255
  • 113 McArthur SJ, Leigh D, Marshall JT, de Boer KA, Jansen RP. Pregnancies and live births after trophectoderm biopsy and preimplantation genetic testing of human blastocysts. Fertil Steril 2005; 84 (6) 1628-1636
  • 114 Escribá MJ, Zulategui JF, Galán A, Mercader A, Remohí J, de los Santos MJ. Vitrification of preimplantation genetically diagnosed human blastocysts and its contribution to the cumulative ongoing pregnancy rate per cycle by using a closed device. Fertil Steril 2008; 89 (4) 840-846
  • 115 El-Toukhy T, Kamal A, Wharf E , et al. Reduction of the multiple pregnancy rate in a preimplantation genetic diagnosis programme after introduction of single blastocyst transfer and cryopreservation of blastocysts biopsied on day 3. Hum Reprod 2009; 24 (10) 2642-2648
  • 116 Van Landuyt L, Verpoest W, Verheyen G , et al. Closed blastocyst vitrification of biopsied embryos: evaluation of 100 consecutive warming cycles. Hum Reprod 2011; 26 (2) 316-322
  • 117 Kahraman S, Candan ZN. Outcomes of vitrified-warmed day-4 embryos after day-3 cleavage-stage biopsy. Reprod Biomed Online 2010; 21 (5) 636-641
  • 118 de Boer KA, Catt JW, Jansen RP, Leigh D, McArthur S. Moving to blastocyst biopsy for preimplantation genetic diagnosis and single embryo transfer at Sydney IVF. Fertil Steril 2004; 82 (2) 295-298
  • 119 Baruch S, Kaufman D, Hudson KL. Genetic testing of embryos: practices and perspectives of US in vitro fertilization clinics. Fertil Steril 2008; 89 (5) 1053-1058
  • 120 Hammoud I, Molina-Gomes D, Albert M , et al. Are zona pellucida laser drilling and polar body biopsy safe for in vitro matured oocytes?. J Assist Reprod Genet 2010; 27 (7) 423-427
  • 121 Spits C, Sermon K. PGD for monogenic disorders: aspects of molecular biology. Prenat Diagn 2009; 29 (1) 50-56
  • 122 Kuliev A, Verlinsky Y. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis: technological advances to improve accuracy and range of applications. Reprod Biomed Online 2008; 16 (4) 532-538
  • 123 Kuliev A, Rechitsky S. Polar body based preimplantation genetic diagnosis for Mendelian disorders. Mol Hum Reprod 2011; ; In press
  • 124 Bellavia M, Von Der Weid N, Peddes C , et al. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) for HLA typing: bases for setting up an open international collaboration when PGD is not available. Fertil Steril 2010; 94 (3) 1129-1131
  • 125 Braude PR, De Wert GM, Evers-Kiebooms G, Pettigrew RA, Geraedts JP. Non-disclosure preimplantation genetic diagnosis for Huntington's disease: practical and ethical dilemmas. Prenat Diagn 1998; 18 (13) 1422-1426
  • 126 Sermon K, De Rijcke M, Lissens W , et al. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis for Huntington's disease with exclusion testing. Eur J Hum Genet 2002; 10 (10) 591-598
  • 127 Tur-Kaspa I, Najeemuddin R. Nondisclosure PGD for late onset autosomal dominant diseases: revised ethical considerations. Reprod Biomed Online 2010; 20 (Suppl. 01) S38-S39
  • 128 Verlinsky Y, Rechitsky S, Schoolcraft W, Strom C, Kuliev A. Preimplantation diagnosis for Fanconi anemia combined with HLA matching. JAMA 2001; 285 (24) 3130-3133
  • 129 Samuel GN, Strong KA, Kerridge I, Jordens CF, Ankeny RA, Shaw PJ. Establishing the role of pre-implantation genetic diagnosis with human leucocyte antigen typing: what place do “saviour siblings” have in paediatric transplantation?. Arch Dis Child 2009; 94 (4) 317-320
  • 130 American Academy of Pediatrics. Committee on Bioethics. Children as hematopoietic stem cell donors. Pediatrics 2010; 125 (2) 392-404
  • 131 National Marrow Donor Program. Outcomes and trends. Available at: http://www.marrow.org/PHYSICIAN/Outcomes_Data/index.html#sources . Accessed February 2010
  • 132 Szabolcs P, Cavazzana-Calvo M, Fischer A, Veys P. Bone marrow transplantation for primary immunodeficiency diseases. Pediatr Clin North Am 2010; 57 (1) 207-237
  • 133 Rechitsky S, Kuliev A, Tur-Kaspa I, Morris R, Verlinsky Y. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis with HLA matching. Reprod Biomed Online 2004; 9 (2) 210-221
  • 134 Fiorentino F, Biricik A, Karadayi H , et al. Development and clinical application of a strategy for preimplantation genetic diagnosis of single gene disorders combined with HLA matching. Mol Hum Reprod 2004; 10 (6) 445-460
  • 135 Kuliev A, Rechitsky S, Verlinsky O , et al. Preimplantation diagnosis and HLA typing for haemoglobin disorders. Reprod Biomed Online 2005; 11 (3) 362-370
  • 136 Rechitsky S, Kuliev A, Sharapova T , et al. Preimplantation HLA typing with aneuploidy testing. Reprod Biomed Online 2006; 12 (1) 89-100
  • 137 Van de Velde H, De Rycke M, De Man C , et al. The experience of two European preimplantation genetic diagnosis centres on human leukocyte antigen typing. Hum Reprod 2009; 24 (3) 732-740
  • 138 Kahraman S, Beyazyurek C, Ekmekci CG. Seven years of experience of preimplantation HLA typing: a clinical overview of 327 cycles. Reprod Biomed Online 2011; 23 (3) 363-371
  • 139 Tur-Kaspa I, Najeemuddin R. When to offer PGD for HLA typing to parents of a sick child: suggested clinical guidelines. Reprod Biomed Online 2010; 20 (Suppl. 01) S39
  • 140 Offit K, Sagi M, Hurley K. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis for cancer syndromes: a new challenge for preventive medicine. JAMA 2006; 296 (22) 2727-2730
  • 141 Simpson JL. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis at 20 years. Prenat Diagn 2010; 30 (7) 682-695
  • 142 Cohen J, Garrisi M, Zouves C , et al. Results of PGD for chromosome abnormalities in 4079 cycles. Fertil Steril 2005; 84 (Suppl. 01) S48
  • 143 Kearns WG, Pen R, Graham J , et al. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis and screening. Semin Reprod Med 2005; 23 (4) 336-347
  • 144 Thornhill AR, deDie-Smulders CE, Geraedts JP , et al; ESHRE PGD Consortium. ESHRE PGD Consortium 'Best practice guidelines for clinical preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) and preimplantation genetic screening (PGS)'. Hum Reprod 2005; 20 (1) 35-48
  • 145 Verlinsky Y, Rechitsky S, Cieslak J, Tur-Kaspa I, Morris R, Kuliev A. Accuracy and outcomes of 3631 preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) cycles performed in one center. Fertil Steril 2005; 84 (Suppl. 01) S98
  • 146 Pagidas K, Ying Y, Keefe D. Predictive value of preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidy screening in repeated IVF-ET cycles among women with recurrent implantation failure. J Assist Reprod Genet 2008; 25 (2–3) 103-106
  • 147 Garrisi JG, Colls P, Ferry KM, Zheng X, Garrisi MG, Munné S. Effect of infertility, maternal age, and number of previous miscarriages on the outcome of preimplantation genetic diagnosis for idiopathic recurrent pregnancy loss. Fertil Steril 2009; 92 (1) 288-295
  • 148 Rabinowitz M, Potter D, Wemmer N, Demko Z, Gemelos G. First clinical outcomes reported on patients undergoing PGD for genetic disorders together with 24 chromosome ploidy using microarrays. Fertil Steril 2011; 95 (Suppl) S6-S7
  • 149 Treff NR, Tao X, Schillings WJ, Bergh PA, Scott Jr RT, Levy B. Use of single nucleotide polymorphism microarrays to distinguish between balanced and normal chromosomes in embryos from a translocation carrier. Fertil Steril 2011; 96 (1) e58-e65
  • 150 Tur-Kaspa I, Rechitsky S, Aljadeff G, Grotjan E, Verlinsky Y. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) for all cystic fibrosis (CF) carrier couples: strategy and cost analysis. Fertil Steril 2006; 86 (Suppl) S59
  • 151 Davis LB, Champion SJ, Fair SO, Baker VL, Garber AM. A cost-benefit analysis of preimplantation genetic diagnosis for carrier couples of cystic fibrosis. Fertil Steril 2010; 93 (6) 1793-1804
  • 152 Yang Z, Liu J, Collins GS , 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: 24 [Epub ahead of print]