Comparative analysis of pregnancy outcomes in preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy and conventional in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer: a stratified examination on the basis of the quantity of oocytes and blastocysts from a multicenter randomized controlled trial
- PMID: 38367687
- DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2024.02.023
Comparative analysis of pregnancy outcomes in preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy and conventional in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer: a stratified examination on the basis of the quantity of oocytes and blastocysts from a multicenter randomized controlled trial
Erratum in
-
Erratum: Comparative analysis of pregnancy outcomes in preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy and conventional in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer: a stratified examination on the basis of the quantity of oocytes and blastocysts from a multicenter randomized controlled trial.Fertil Steril. 2024 Oct;122(4):765. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2024.08.317. Epub 2024 Sep 10. Fertil Steril. 2024. PMID: 39254612 No abstract available.
Abstract
Objective: To investigate variations in pregnancy outcomes between preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) and conventional in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF-ET) treatment across distinct groups categorized by oocyte and blastocyst counts. Because the live birth rate (LBR) of assisted reproductive technology treatment is influenced by the number of oocytes and blastocysts retrieved. Our previous study indicated comparable cumulative LBRs (CLBRs) between conventional IVF-ET and PGT-A.
Design: A post hoc exploratory secondary analysis of data from a multicenter randomized controlled trial compared the CLBRs between conventional IVF-ET and PGT-A.
Setting: Academic fertility centers.
Subjects: A total of 1,212 infertile women with a good prognosis for a live birth after PGT-A or conventional IVF-ET were included.
Intervention: Women underwent PGT-A or conventional IVF-ET.
Main outcome measure(s): Cumulative LBR, cumulative clinical pregnancy loss (CPL) rate, and good birth outcome.
Result(s): In the study, all participants were divided into 4 groups on the basis of quartiles of the number of oocytes retrieved, or blastocysts. There was an interaction between whether to perform PGT-A and the oocyte numbers category on cumulative CPL and biochemical pregnancy loss. Chi-square analysis revealed that the PGT-A group showed a lower cumulative frequency of CPL compared with the IVF-ET group (PGT-A vs. IVF-ET: 5.9% vs. 13.7%; relative risk = 0.430; 95% confidence interval, 0.243-0.763) when the number of oocytes retrieved was <15. Although there was no interaction on CLBR when the retrieved oocyte count ranged from 19-23 (19≤ oocytes <23) the PGT-A group exhibited a lower CLBR than the conventional IVF-ET group (PGT-A vs IVF-ET: 75.6% vs 87.1%; relative risk = 0.868; 95% confidence interval, 0.774-0.973), and the average body weight of newborns from the PGT-A group was approximately 142 g lower than that of the conventional IVF-ET group (PGT-A vs. IVF-ET: 3,334 ± 479 g vs. 3,476 ± 473 g). However, no statistically significant difference in the CLBR was observed between the PGT-A and IVF-ET groups in the other oocyte or blastocyst groups.
Conclusion: When the number of retrieved eggs was <15, the PGT-A group exhibited a lower cumulative CPL rate but no higher CLBR than the conventional IVF-ET group.
Clinical trial registration number: NCT03118141.
Keywords: Cumulative live birth rate; IVF-ET; PGT-A; blastocyst; oocyte.
Copyright © 2024 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
Declaration of Interests M.H. has nothing to disclose. M.L. has nothing to disclose. S.T. has nothing to disclose. L.G. has nothing to disclose. Z.Z. has nothing to disclose. Z-J.C. has nothing to disclose. Y.L. has nothing to disclose.
Similar articles
-
Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies (abnormal number of chromosomes) in in vitro fertilisation.Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020 Sep 8;9(9):CD005291. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005291.pub3. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2020. PMID: 32898291 Free PMC article.
-
Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy is associated with reduced live birth rates in fresh but not frozen donor oocyte in vitro fertilization cycles: an analysis of 18,562 donor cycles reported to Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcome Reporting System.Fertil Steril. 2025 Jan;123(1):50-60. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2024.08.315. Epub 2024 Aug 10. Fertil Steril. 2025. PMID: 39128672
-
Cumulative live birth rates of 31 478 untested embryos from 11 463 women challenge traditional recurrent implantation failure definitions.Hum Reprod. 2025 May 1;40(5):818-833. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deaf036. Hum Reprod. 2025. PMID: 40064027
-
Value of PGT-A when only one or two blastocysts are obtained: propensity-score matching and cost-effectiveness study.Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2025 Jan;65(1):106-113. doi: 10.1002/uog.29148. Epub 2024 Dec 7. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2025. PMID: 39644516
-
Transfer of the fittest: using preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy to select embryo(s) most likely to lead to live birth.F S Sci. 2023 May;4(2S):2-6. doi: 10.1016/j.xfss.2022.12.005. Epub 2023 Jan 18. F S Sci. 2023. PMID: 36669620 Review.
Cited by
-
Effect of prior anti-tuberculosis treatment on assisted reproductive outcomes in infertile women: a retrospective cohort study.BMJ Open. 2025 Jul 18;15(7):e098692. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2024-098692. BMJ Open. 2025. PMID: 40681192 Free PMC article.
-
The obstetrical and infant outcomes of trophectoderm biopsy on preimplantation genetic testing embryos after frozen single embryo transfer cycles.J Assist Reprod Genet. 2025 Jul 9. doi: 10.1007/s10815-025-03512-7. Online ahead of print. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2025. PMID: 40632424
-
The clinical application and challenges of preimplantation genetic testing.Front Genet. 2025 Jun 2;16:1599088. doi: 10.3389/fgene.2025.1599088. eCollection 2025. Front Genet. 2025. PMID: 40529808 Free PMC article. Review.
-
Embryo versus endometrial receptivity: untangling a complex debate.Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2025 Jan 22;16:1537847. doi: 10.3389/fendo.2025.1537847. eCollection 2025. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2025. PMID: 39911920 Free PMC article. No abstract available.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Associated data
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical