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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor principal: Ben Rafael, Zion
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