medigraphic.com
Federación Mexicana de Ginecología y Obstetricia, A.C.

2023, Number 02

<< Back Next >>

Ginecol Obstet Mex 2023; 91 (02)

Repeat biopsy in case of amplification failure

Calull-Bagó A, Izaguirre-Hernández MT, Victores-Monroy A, Martínez-Robles I, González-Ortega C, Gutiérrez-Gutiérrez AM

Language: Spanish
References: 20
Page: 100-108
PDF size: 216.26 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Objective: To analyze possible factors associated with amplification failures, euploidy and clinical outcomes between repeat and single biopsy embryos (control group).
Materials and Methods: Retrospective multicenter study involving 4,106 blastocysts from 1,007 ICSI cycles with preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy performed by next generation sequencing. In case of DNA amplification failure, the IVF center where biopsies were performed, the day of biopsy, the embryo quality and the incidence of complications during biopsy were analyzed. Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy results and clinical outcomes were compared between re-biopsied embryos and the control group.
Results: Of the 4,106 blastocysts included in this study, 96.0% (3,942) obtained a result while 4.0% (164) had an amplification failure. Ninety-nine embryos with amplification failure were re-biopsied and 83.8% resulted in an informative diagnosis. Euploidy rates were equivalent between re-biopsied and control blastocysts (34.9% vs 39.7%, P›0.05). The only factor significantly affecting the amplification failure rates was the IVF center. No differences were observed between biopsy days or embryo quality. Pregnancy (51.0% vs 58.3%), implantation (63.9% vs 61.5%) and miscarriage rates (16.9% vs 28.6%) were similar between single and repeat biopsied embryos, respectively.
Conclusions: The centre was the main factor influencing amplification failures. Euploidy rates and clinical outcomes did not differ between the control group and repeat biopsied embryos; therefore, repeat biopsy is recommended for embryos with amplification failure.


REFERENCES

  1. Handyside AH, Kontogianni EH, Hardy K, Winston RML.Pregnancies from biopsied human preimplantation embryossexed by Y-specific DNA amplification. Nature 1990;344 (6268): 768-70. https://doi.org/10.1038/344768a0

  2. Navot D, Drews MR, Bergh PA, Guzman I, Karstaedt A, ScottJr RT, et al. Age-related decline in female fertility is not dueto diminished capacity of the uterus to sustain embryoimplantation. Fertil Steril 1994; 61 (1): 97-101. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(16)56459-0

  3. Dyban A, Freidine M, Severova E, Cieslak J, IvakhnenkoV, Verlinsky Y. Detection of aneuploidy in human oocytesand corresponding first polar bodies by fluorescent in situhybridization. J Assist Reprod Genet 1996; 13 (1): 73-78.https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02068874

  4. Harton GL, Harper JC, Coonen E, Pehlivan T, Vesela K, WiltonL. ESHRE PGD consortium best practice guidelines forfluorescence in situ hybridization-based PGD. Hum Reprod2011; 26: 25-32. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deq230

  5. Capalbo A, Ubaldi FM, Cimadomo D, Maggiulli R, PatassiniC, Dusi L, et al. Consistent and reproducible outcomes ofblastocyst biopsy and aneuploidy screening across differentbiopsy practitioners: a multicentre study involving 2586embryo biopsies. Hum Reprod 2016; 31 (1): 199-208.https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dev294

  6. Neal SA, Franasiak JM, Forman EJ, Werner MD, Morin SJ,Tao X, et al. High relative deoxyribonucleic acid contentof trophectoderm biopsy adversely affects pregnancyoutcomes. Fertil Steril 2017; 107 (3): 731-736. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.11.013

  7. Zhang S, Luo K, Cheng D, Tan Y, Lu C, He H, et al. Number ofbiopsied trophectoderm cells is likely to affect the implantationpotential of blastocysts with poor trophectodermquality. Fertil Steril 2016; 105 (5): 1222-27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.01.011

  8. Cimadomo D, Rienzi L, Romanelli V, Alviggi E, Levi-SettiPE, Albani E, et al. Inconclusive chromosomal assessmentafter blastocyst biopsy: prevalence, causative factors andoutcomes after re-biopsy and re-vitrification. A multicenterexperience. Hum Reprod 2018; 33 (10): 1839-46. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dey282

  9. Herrero Grassa L, Cascales Romero L, Ortiz Salcedo JA,Aparicio González M, Ten Morro J, Bernabeu Pérez R. Doesthe trophectoderm biopsy technique affect the result ofthe genetic analysis in PGT-A cycles? Hum Reprod Abstractbook 2019; 34 (Supplement 1): 0-248 i111

  10. Calull A, Coyotecatl C, Piña RE, Cancino P, González C,Gutiérrez AM. Análisis del mosaicismo en blastocistosmediante secuenciación masiva: cromosomas afectadosy relación con la edad materna. Reproducción (México)2020; 11: 1-8. https://doi.org /10.24245/rmmr.v11id.4037

  11. Gardner DK, Lane M, Stevens J, Schlenker T, Schoolcraft WB.Blastocyst score affects implantation and pregnancy outcome:towards a single blastocyst transfer. Fertil Steril 2020; 73 (6):1155-58. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(00)00518-5

  12. Brower M, Hill D, Danzer H, Surrey M, Ghadir S, ChangW, et al. ‘No diagnosis’ embryos after PGS should not bediscarded: rebiopsy and reanalysis demonstrate the majorityare euploid. Fertil Steril 2014; 102: e31. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.07.114

  13. Zhang S, Tan K, Gong F, Gu Y, Tan Y, Lu C, et al. Blastocystscan be rebiopsied for preimplantation genetic diagnosisand screening. Fertil Steril 2014; 102: 164-45. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.09.018

  14. Kaing A, Kroener L, Brower M, HIll D, Danzer H, Barritt J.Rebiopsy and preimplanation genetic screening (PGS) reanalysisdemonstrate the majority of originally ‘no diagnosis’embryos are euploid with comparable pregnancy rates.Fertil Steril 2015; 104: e277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.07.869

  15. Swain JE, Schoolcraft WB, Katz-Jaffe M. Dual trophectodermbiopsy on the same blastocyst does not impairclinical outcomes. Fertil Steril 2015; 104: e186. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.07.577

  16. Lee H, McCulloh DH, Olivares R, Goldstein-Tufaro A,McCaffrey C, Grifo J. Live births after transfer of rebiopsyand revitrification of blastocyst that had ‘no diagnosis’following trophectoderm biopsy. Fertil Steril 2016; 106:e164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.07.483

  17. Neal SA, Forman EJ, Juneau CR, Morin J, Molinaro T, SunL, et al. Rebiopsy and preimplantation genetic screening(PGS) reanalysis for embryos with an initial non-diagnosticresult yields a euploid result in the majority of cases.Fertil Steril 2017;108: e276. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.07.821

  18. Capalbo A, Rienzi L, Cimadomo D, Maggiulli R, Elliott T,Wright G, et al. Correlation between standard blastocystmorphology, euploidy and implantation: an observationalstudy in two centers involving 956 screened blastocysts.Hum Reprod 2014; 29 (6): 1173-181. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deu033

  19. Neal SA, Sun L, Jalas C, Morin SJ, Molinaro TA, Scott RT.When next-generation sequencing-based preimplantationgenetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) yields an inconclusivereport: diagnostic results and clinical outcomes afterre biopsy. J Assist Reprod Genet 2019; 36 (10): 2103-109.https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-019-01550-6

  20. Bradley CK, Livingstone M, Traversa MV, McArthur SJ.Impact of multiple blastocyst biopsy and vitrificationwarmingprocedures on pregnancy outcomes. Fert Steril2017; 108 (6): 999-1006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.09.013




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com