» Articles » PMID: 36149614

Comment on the Recent PGDIS Position Statement on the Transfer of Mosaic Embryos 2021

Overview
Publisher Springer
Date 2022 Sep 23
PMID 36149614
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The worldwide demand of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) is still growing. However, chromosomal mosaic results greatly challenge the clinical practice. The recently published PGDIS Position Statement on the Transfer of Mosaic Embryos is the third PGDIS position statement on how to deal with embryos diagnosed as chromosomal mosaics (CM) and, one of many attempts of different societies and working groups to provide a guideline for clinicians, laboratories, clinics, and genetic counselors. But still, as in previous statements, many issues remained unresolved. Moreover, from our point of view, the question how to deal with embryos diagnosed as CM, consisting of two or more karyological cell lines cannot be separated from all the other aspects of PGT-A including its accuracy. The paucity of clearcut indications for PGT-A and evidence of benefit as well as an overall cost-benefit assessment is given below.

Citing Articles

Evolution of Minimally Invasive and Non-Invasive Preimplantation Genetic Testing: An Overview.

Moustakli E, Zikopoulos A, Skentou C, Bouba I, Dafopoulos K, Georgiou I J Clin Med. 2024; 13(8).

PMID: 38673433 PMC: 11050362. DOI: 10.3390/jcm13082160.


Embryo drop-out rates in preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A): a retrospective data analysis from the DoLoRes study.

Wirleitner B, Hruba M, Schuff M, Hradecky L, Stecher A, Damko A J Assist Reprod Genet. 2023; 41(1):193-203.

PMID: 37878220 PMC: 10789689. DOI: 10.1007/s10815-023-02976-9.


A review of the 2021/2022 PGDIS Position Statement on the transfer of mosaic embryos.

Gleicher N, Mochizuki L, Barad D, Patrizio P, Orvieto R J Assist Reprod Genet. 2023; 40(4):817-826.

PMID: 36892704 PMC: 10224891. DOI: 10.1007/s10815-023-02763-6.

References
1.
Somigliana E, Busnelli A, Paffoni A, Vigano P, Riccaboni A, Rubio C . Cost-effectiveness of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies. Fertil Steril. 2019; 111(6):1169-1176. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.01.025. View

2.
Murugappan G, Ohno M, Lathi R . Cost-effectiveness analysis of preimplantation genetic screening and in vitro fertilization versus expectant management in patients with unexplained recurrent pregnancy loss. Fertil Steril. 2015; 103(5):1215-20. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.02.012. View

3.
Robinson R, Rippentrop S, McLaughlin J . What are the cost considerations for preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy?. Fertil Steril. 2019; 111(6):1115-1116. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.02.022. View

4.
Mochizuki L, Gleicher N . The PGS/PGT-A controversy in IVF addressed as a formal conflict resolution analysis. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2020; 37(3):677-687. PMC: 7125270. DOI: 10.1007/s10815-020-01688-8. View

5.
Bolton H, Graham S, VAN DER Aa N, Kumar P, Theunis K, Fernandez Gallardo E . Mouse model of chromosome mosaicism reveals lineage-specific depletion of aneuploid cells and normal developmental potential. Nat Commun. 2016; 7:11165. PMC: 4820631. DOI: 10.1038/ncomms11165. View