» Articles » PMID: 33454211

Consistent Results of Non-invasive PGT-A of Human Embryos Using Two Different Techniques for Chromosomal Analysis

Overview
Publisher Elsevier
Date 2021 Jan 17
PMID 33454211
Citations 11
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Research Question: Are discordances in non-invasive preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies (niPGT-A) results attributable to the technique used for chromosomal analysis?

Design: A prospective blinded study was performed (September 2018 to December 2019). In total 302 chromosomal analyses were performed: 92 trophectoderm PGT-A biopsies and their corresponding spent embryo culture medium (SCM) evaluated by two methods (n = 184), negative controls (n = 8), and trophectoderm and inner cell mass biopsies from trophectoderm-aneuploid embryos (n = 18). Trophectoderm analyses were carried out using Veriseq (Illumina), and SCM was analysed using Veriseq and NICS (Yikon).

Results: Genetic results were obtained for 96.8% of trophectoderm samples versus 92.4% for both SCM techniques. The mosaicism rate was higher for SCM regardless of the technique used: 30.4% for SCM-NICS and 28.3% for SCM-Veriseq versus 14.1% for trophectoderm biopsies (P = 0.013, P = 0.031, respectively). No significant differences in diagnostic concordance were seen between the two SCM techniques (74.6% for SCM-NICS versus 72.3% for SCM-Veriseq; P = 0.861). For embryos biopsied on day 6, these rates reached 92.0% and 86.5%, respectively. On reanalysing trophectoderm-aneuploid embryos, the discrepancies were shown to be due to maternal DNA contamination (55.6%; 5/9), embryo mosaicism (22.2%; 2/9) and low resolution in SCM-NICS (11.1%; 1/9) and in both SCM techniques (11.1%; 1/9).

Conclusions: This is the first study evaluating the consistency of different chromosomal analysis techniques for niPGT-A. In conclusion, the diagnostic concordance between PGT-A and niPGT-A seems independent of the technique used. Optimization of culture conditions and medium retrieval provides a potential target to improve the reliability of niPGT-A.

Citing Articles

The diagnostic accuracy of preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) in assessing the genetic status of embryos: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Chen K, Hu Z, Lian Y, Han Y, Zhou X, Li Y Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2025; 23(1):39.

PMID: 40069837 PMC: 11895315. DOI: 10.1186/s12958-025-01376-1.


Comparison of Non-Invasive and Minimally Invasive Preimplantation Genetic Testing for Aneuploidy Using Samples Derived from the Same Embryo Culture.

Bednarska-Czerwinska A, Smolen-Dzirba J, Strychalska A, Sierka W, Wroblewska U, Mermer P J Clin Med. 2025; 14(1.

PMID: 39797117 PMC: 11721003. DOI: 10.3390/jcm14010033.


Non Invasive Preimplantation Testing for Aneuploidies in Assisted Reproduction: A SWOT Analysis.

de Albornoz E, Dominguez Arroyo J, Iriarte Y, Vendrell X, Vidal V, Roig M Reprod Sci. 2024; 32(1):1-14.

PMID: 39433699 DOI: 10.1007/s43032-024-01698-2.


Conditions for improved accuracy of noninvasive preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy: Focusing on the zona pellucida and early blastocysts.

Takeuchi H, Morishita M, Uemura M, Maezawa T, Shibahara T, Takayama E Reprod Med Biol. 2024; 23(1):e12604.

PMID: 39263385 PMC: 11387587. DOI: 10.1002/rmb2.12604.


Optimizing non-invasive preimplantation genetic testing: investigating culture conditions, sample collection, and IVF treatment for improved non-invasive PGT-A results.

Chow J, Lam K, Cheng H, Lai S, Yeung W, Ng E J Assist Reprod Genet. 2024; 41(2):465-472.

PMID: 38183536 PMC: 10894776. DOI: 10.1007/s10815-023-03015-3.