Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy in various protocols of assisted reproductive technologies with vitrified embryo
- Authors: Kvashnina E.V.1, Tutakov M.A.1, Vakhlova O.S.1, Tomina E.V.1, Shilova N.V.2
-
Affiliations:
- Rehabilitation Center for Reproductive Disorders «Partus»
- «Reprohelp» Ltd
- Issue: No 3 (2021)
- Pages: 175-182
- Section: Articles
- URL: https://journals.eco-vector.com/0300-9092/article/view/249137
- DOI: https://doi.org/10.18565/aig.2021.3.175-182
- ID: 249137
Cite item
Open Access
Access granted
Abstract
Objective. To assess the effect of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) on the outcomes of assisted reproductive technologies (ART) cycles with vitrified embryo transfer in different protocols. Material and methods. This study analyzed 313 ART cycles with vitrified embryo and use of dydrogesterone for luteal phase support. These cycles were differentiated depending on the type of cryotransfer protocol and performance of PGT-A. The association of PGT-A and the outcome of the ART program with the vitrified embryo was evaluated depending on the type of protocol. Results. The protocols with the ovulatory cycle revealed a higher frequency of implantation in the cycles with PGT-A. The protocols with estrogens in the subgroup with PGT-A showed an increase in the frequency of implantation and a decrease in the proportion of pregnancy losses at the stage from biochemical to clinical pregnancy. GnRH agonist protocols demonstrated that the use of PGT-A was associated with a significant increase in the frequency of positive outcomes of the ART program (p=0.036). Conclusion. PGT-A positively affects the outcomes of ART programs with vitrified embryo and use of dydrogesterone for luteal phase support, improving their clinical outcomes.
Full Text
About the authors
Elena V. Kvashnina
Rehabilitation Center for Reproductive Disorders «Partus»
Email: doctor.kvashnina@gmail.com
PhD, leading reproductive specialist
Maks/m A. Tutakov
Rehabilitation Center for Reproductive Disorders «Partus»
Email: tutakov@ivf-partus.ru
Leading embryologist
Olesya S. Vakhlova
Rehabilitation Center for Reproductive Disorders «Partus»
Email: dr.vakhlova@mail.ru
obstetrician-gynecologist, fertility specialist
Evgenia V. Tomina
Rehabilitation Center for Reproductive Disorders «Partus»
Email: tomina@ivf-partus.ru
Deputy Director for Organizational and Methodological Work
Natalya V. Shilova
«Reprohelp» Ltd
Email: nvshilova@gmail.com
PhD, Director
References
- Barbosa M.W.P., Valadares N.P.B., Barbosa A.C.P., Amaral A.S., Iglesias J.R., Nastri C.O. et al. Oral dydrogesterone vs. vaginal progesterone capsules for luteal-phase support in women undergoing embryo transfer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. JBRA Assist. Reprod. 2018; 22(2): 148-56. https:// dx.doi.org/10.5935/1518-0557.20180018.
- Tomic V., Kasum M., Vucic K. The role of luteal support during IVF: a qualitative systematic review. Gynecol. Endocrinol. 2019; 35(10): 829-34. https://dx.doi. org/10.1080/09513590.2019.1603288.
- Atzmon Y., Aslih N., Estrada D., Bilgory A., Ellenbogen A., Shalom-Paz E. Comparable outcomes using oral dydrogesterone vs. micronized vaginal progesterone in frozen embryo transfer: a retrospective cohort study. Reprod. Sci. 2020 Nov 2. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s43032-020-00376-3.
- Thakre N., Homburg R. Л. review of IVF in PCOS patients at risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. Expert Rev. Endocrinol. Metab. 2019; 14(5): 315-9. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17446651.2019.1631797.
- Женское бесплодие (современные подходы к диагностике и лечению) клинические рекомендации (протокол лечения). Письмо Минздрава Российской Федерации от 15 февраля 2019 г. № 15-4/И/21218. [Female infertility (modern approaches to diagnosis and treatment) clinical recommendations (treatment protocol). Letter No. 15-4/I/2-1218 of the Ministry of Health of the Russian Federation dated February 15, 2019. (in Russian)]. Available at: http://www.consultant.ru/document/ cons_doc_LAW_319098/
- ESHRE Reproductive Endocrinology Guideline Group Ovarian Stimulation for IVF/ICSI. Available at: https://www.eshre.eu/Guidelines-and-Legal/ Guidelines/Ovarian-Stimulation-in-IVF-ICSI Accessed 3 Лpril 2020.
- Квашнина Е.В., Тутаков М.А., Томина Е.В., Берестецкая О.С., Немсцверидзе Э.Я., Шилова Н.В. Сегментация цикла вспомогательных репродуктивных технологий как инструмент повышения эффективности преодоления бесплодия. Уральский медицинский журнал. 2019; 5: 116 23.
- Harris M., Taylor G. Medical statistics made easy. London: Taylor and Francis; 2006. 114р.
- Vercellini P., Consonni D., Dridi D., Bracco B., Frattaruolo M.P., Somigliana E. Uterine adenomyosis and in vitro fertilization outcome: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum. Reprod. 2014; 29(5): 964-77. https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/ humrep/deu041.
- Бейк Е.П., Сыркашева А.Г., Долгушина Н.В. Эффективность программ вспомогательных репродуктивных технологий у пациенток позднего репродуктивного возраста. Гинекология. 2018; 20(1): 109-12. [Beik E.P., Syrkasheva A.G., Dolgushina N.V. Effectiveness of assisted reproductive technology programs in patients of late reproductive age. Gynecology. 2018; 20(1): 109-12. (in Russian)]. URL: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/ effektivnost-programm-vspomogatelnyh-reproduktivnyh-tehnologiy-u-patsientok-pozdnego-reproduktivnogo-vozrasta.
- Bergh C., Josefsson B., Nilsson L., Hamberger L. The success rate in a Swedish in-vitro fertilization unit: a cohort study. Acta Obstet. Gynecol. Scand. 1995; 74(6): 446-50.
- Coates A., Kung A., Mounts E., Hesla J., Bankowski B., Barbieri E. et al. Optimal euploid embryo transfer strategy, fresh versus frozen, after preimplantation genetic screening with next generation sequencing: a randomized controlled trial. Fertil. Steril. 2017; 107(3): 723-30. e3. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j. fertnstert.2016.12.022.
- Griesinger G., Blockeel C., Tournaye H. Oral dydrogesterone for luteal phase support in fresh in vitro fertilization cycles: a new standard? Fertil. Steril. 2018; 109(5): 756-62. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.03.034.
- Schmutzler A.G. Theory and practice of preimplantation genetic screening (PGS). Eur. J. Med. Genet. 2019; 62(8): 103670. https://dx.doi.org/10.1016/ j.ejmg.2019.103670.
- Рыбина А.Н., Ворошилова И.Г., Исенова С.Ш., Локшин В.Н. Современные методы повышения эффективности вспомогательных репродуктивных технологий в Казахстане. Вестник Казахского национального медицин ского университета. 2019; 1: 23-6. [Rybina A. N., Khoroshilova I. G., Isenova S. Sh., Lokshin V. N. Modern methods of improving the effectiveness of assisted reproductive technologies in Kazakhstan. Bulletin of KazNMU. 2019; 1: 23-6. (in Russian)]. Available at: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/sovremennye-metody-povysheniya-effektivnosti-vspomogatelnyh-reproduktivnyh-tehnologiy-v-kazahstane.
- Geraedts J., Sermon K. Preimplantation genetic screening 2.0: the theory. Mol. Hum. Reprod. 2016; 22(8): 839-44. https://dx.doi.org/10.1093/molehr/ gaw033.
- Fedorova E.M., Shlykova S.A., Shunkina K.V., Zaitceva O.G., Lapina E.N., Yanchuk T.V., Kalugina A.S. Outcomes of IVF cycles coupled with PGS by aCGH of embryos from donor and autologous oocytes, transferred after vitrification to women of advanced maternal age. Gynecol. Endocrinol. 2017; 33(9): 737-40. https://dx.doi.org/10.1080/ 09513590.2017.1318274.
- Coates A., Bankowski B.J., Kung A., Griffin D.K., Munne S. Differences in pregnancy outcomes in donor egg frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles following preimplantation genetic screening (PGS): a single center retrospective study. J. Assist. Reprod. Genet. 2017; 34(1): 71-8. https://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10815-016-0832-z.
Supplementary files
