Cargando…
Endometrial Receptivity Analysis (ERA) test: an unproven technology
This article addresses the limitations of the endometrial receptivity array (ERA) methodology to increase implantation. Such limitations vary from the assumed inconsistency of the endometrial biopsy, the variable number of genes found to be dysregulated in endometrium samples without the embryonal-i...
Autor principal: | |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Oxford University Press
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8045470/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33880419 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/hropen/hoab010 |
_version_ | 1783678687537790976 |
---|---|
author | Ben Rafael, Zion |
author_facet | Ben Rafael, Zion |
author_sort | Ben Rafael, Zion |
collection | PubMed |
description | This article addresses the limitations of the endometrial receptivity array (ERA) methodology to increase implantation. Such limitations vary from the assumed inconsistency of the endometrial biopsy, the variable number of genes found to be dysregulated in endometrium samples without the embryonal-induced effect, the failure to account for the simultaneous serum progesterone level, and the expected low percentage of patients who may need this add-on procedure, to the difficulties in synchronising the endometrium with hormone replacements in successive cycles and the inherent perinatal risks associated with routine cryopreservation of embryos. Without a gold standard to compare, the claim that the window of implantation (WOI) might be off by ±12 h only requires a good argument for the advantage it provides to human procreation, knowing that embryos can linger for days before actual embedding starts and that the window is actually a few days. The intra-patient variations in the test need to be addressed. In summary, like all other add-ons, it is doubtful whether the ERA test use can significantly enhance implantation success rates. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8045470 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Oxford University Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-80454702021-04-19 Endometrial Receptivity Analysis (ERA) test: an unproven technology Ben Rafael, Zion Hum Reprod Open Debate This article addresses the limitations of the endometrial receptivity array (ERA) methodology to increase implantation. Such limitations vary from the assumed inconsistency of the endometrial biopsy, the variable number of genes found to be dysregulated in endometrium samples without the embryonal-induced effect, the failure to account for the simultaneous serum progesterone level, and the expected low percentage of patients who may need this add-on procedure, to the difficulties in synchronising the endometrium with hormone replacements in successive cycles and the inherent perinatal risks associated with routine cryopreservation of embryos. Without a gold standard to compare, the claim that the window of implantation (WOI) might be off by ±12 h only requires a good argument for the advantage it provides to human procreation, knowing that embryos can linger for days before actual embedding starts and that the window is actually a few days. The intra-patient variations in the test need to be addressed. In summary, like all other add-ons, it is doubtful whether the ERA test use can significantly enhance implantation success rates. Oxford University Press 2021-04-14 /pmc/articles/PMC8045470/ /pubmed/33880419 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/hropen/hoab010 Text en © The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) ), which permits unrestricted reuse, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Debate Ben Rafael, Zion Endometrial Receptivity Analysis (ERA) test: an unproven technology |
title | Endometrial Receptivity Analysis (ERA) test: an unproven
technology |
title_full | Endometrial Receptivity Analysis (ERA) test: an unproven
technology |
title_fullStr | Endometrial Receptivity Analysis (ERA) test: an unproven
technology |
title_full_unstemmed | Endometrial Receptivity Analysis (ERA) test: an unproven
technology |
title_short | Endometrial Receptivity Analysis (ERA) test: an unproven
technology |
title_sort | endometrial receptivity analysis (era) test: an unproven
technology |
topic | Debate |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8045470/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33880419 http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/hropen/hoab010 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT benrafaelzion endometrialreceptivityanalysiseratestanunproventechnology |