Cargando…
Can Comprehensive Chromosome Screening Technology Improve IVF/ICSI Outcomes? A Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE: To examine whether comprehensive chromosome screening (CCS) for preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) has an effect on improving in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI) outcomes compared to traditional morphological methods. METHODS: A literature search was co...
Autores principales: | , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4607161/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26470028 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0140779 |
_version_ | 1782395469177028608 |
---|---|
author | Chen, Minghao Wei, Shiyou Hu, Junyan Quan, Song |
author_facet | Chen, Minghao Wei, Shiyou Hu, Junyan Quan, Song |
author_sort | Chen, Minghao |
collection | PubMed |
description | OBJECTIVE: To examine whether comprehensive chromosome screening (CCS) for preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) has an effect on improving in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI) outcomes compared to traditional morphological methods. METHODS: A literature search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, CNKI and ClinicalTrials.gov up to May 2015. Two reviewers independently evaluated titles and abstracts, extracted data and assessed quality. We included studies that compared the IVF/ICSI outcomes of CCS-based embryo selection with those of the traditional morphological method. Relative risk (RR) values with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated in RevMan 5.3, and subgroup analysis and Begg’s test were used to assess heterogeneity and potential publication bias, respectively. RESULTS: Four RCTs and seven cohort studies were included. A meta-analysis of the outcomes showed that compared to morphological criteria, euploid embryos identified by CCS were more likely to be successfully implanted (RCT RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.18–1.47; cohort study RR 1.74, 95% CI 1.35–2.24). CCS-based PGS was also related to an increased clinical pregnancy rate (RCT RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.83–1.93; cohort study RR 1.48, 95% CI 1.20–1.83), an increased ongoing pregnancy rate (RCT RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.64–2.66; cohort study RR 1.61, 95% CI 1.30–2.00), and an increased live birth rate (RCT RR 1.26, 95% CI 1.05–1.50; cohort study RR 1.35, 95% CI 0.85–2.13) as well as a decreased miscarriage rate (RCT RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.24–1.15; cohort study RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.21–0.46) and a decreased multiple pregnancy rate (RCT RR 0.02, 95% CI 0.00–0.26; cohort study RR 0.19, 95% CI 0.07–0.51). The results of the subgroup analysis also showed a significantly increased implantation rate in the CCS group. CONCLUSIONS: The effectiveness of CCS-based PGS is comparable to that of traditional morphological methods, with better outcomes for women receiving IVF/ICSI technology. The transfer of both trophectoderm-biopsied and blastomere-biopsied CCS-euploid embryos can improve the implantation rate. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4607161 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-46071612015-10-29 Can Comprehensive Chromosome Screening Technology Improve IVF/ICSI Outcomes? A Meta-Analysis Chen, Minghao Wei, Shiyou Hu, Junyan Quan, Song PLoS One Research Article OBJECTIVE: To examine whether comprehensive chromosome screening (CCS) for preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) has an effect on improving in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI) outcomes compared to traditional morphological methods. METHODS: A literature search was conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, CNKI and ClinicalTrials.gov up to May 2015. Two reviewers independently evaluated titles and abstracts, extracted data and assessed quality. We included studies that compared the IVF/ICSI outcomes of CCS-based embryo selection with those of the traditional morphological method. Relative risk (RR) values with corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated in RevMan 5.3, and subgroup analysis and Begg’s test were used to assess heterogeneity and potential publication bias, respectively. RESULTS: Four RCTs and seven cohort studies were included. A meta-analysis of the outcomes showed that compared to morphological criteria, euploid embryos identified by CCS were more likely to be successfully implanted (RCT RR 1.32, 95% CI 1.18–1.47; cohort study RR 1.74, 95% CI 1.35–2.24). CCS-based PGS was also related to an increased clinical pregnancy rate (RCT RR 1.26, 95% CI 0.83–1.93; cohort study RR 1.48, 95% CI 1.20–1.83), an increased ongoing pregnancy rate (RCT RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.64–2.66; cohort study RR 1.61, 95% CI 1.30–2.00), and an increased live birth rate (RCT RR 1.26, 95% CI 1.05–1.50; cohort study RR 1.35, 95% CI 0.85–2.13) as well as a decreased miscarriage rate (RCT RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.24–1.15; cohort study RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.21–0.46) and a decreased multiple pregnancy rate (RCT RR 0.02, 95% CI 0.00–0.26; cohort study RR 0.19, 95% CI 0.07–0.51). The results of the subgroup analysis also showed a significantly increased implantation rate in the CCS group. CONCLUSIONS: The effectiveness of CCS-based PGS is comparable to that of traditional morphological methods, with better outcomes for women receiving IVF/ICSI technology. The transfer of both trophectoderm-biopsied and blastomere-biopsied CCS-euploid embryos can improve the implantation rate. Public Library of Science 2015-10-15 /pmc/articles/PMC4607161/ /pubmed/26470028 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0140779 Text en © 2015 Chen et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Chen, Minghao Wei, Shiyou Hu, Junyan Quan, Song Can Comprehensive Chromosome Screening Technology Improve IVF/ICSI Outcomes? A Meta-Analysis |
title | Can Comprehensive Chromosome Screening Technology Improve IVF/ICSI Outcomes? A Meta-Analysis |
title_full | Can Comprehensive Chromosome Screening Technology Improve IVF/ICSI Outcomes? A Meta-Analysis |
title_fullStr | Can Comprehensive Chromosome Screening Technology Improve IVF/ICSI Outcomes? A Meta-Analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Can Comprehensive Chromosome Screening Technology Improve IVF/ICSI Outcomes? A Meta-Analysis |
title_short | Can Comprehensive Chromosome Screening Technology Improve IVF/ICSI Outcomes? A Meta-Analysis |
title_sort | can comprehensive chromosome screening technology improve ivf/icsi outcomes? a meta-analysis |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4607161/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26470028 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0140779 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT chenminghao cancomprehensivechromosomescreeningtechnologyimproveivficsioutcomesametaanalysis AT weishiyou cancomprehensivechromosomescreeningtechnologyimproveivficsioutcomesametaanalysis AT hujunyan cancomprehensivechromosomescreeningtechnologyimproveivficsioutcomesametaanalysis AT quansong cancomprehensivechromosomescreeningtechnologyimproveivficsioutcomesametaanalysis |