Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26024488›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2015

Increasing live birth rate by preimplantation genetic screening of pooled polar bodies using array comparative genomic hybridization.

Michael Feichtinger, Tina Stopp, Christian Göbl, Elisabeth Feichtinger, Enrico Vaccari, Ulrike Mädel, Franco Laccone, Monika Stroh-Weigert, Markus Hengstschläger, Wilfried Feichtinger and 1 more

Erratum issuedOpen access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
8.0field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 32 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Aneuploidy detection in pooled polar bodies using rapid nanopore sequencing.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2024
    Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Preimplantation genetic screening 2.0: the theory.Molecular human reproduction · 2016
    Review
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Michael FeichtingerWunschbaby Institut Feichtinger, Vienna, Austria.
Tina StoppWunschbaby Institut Feichtinger, Vienna, Austria.
Christian GöblDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Elisabeth FeichtingerWunschbaby Institut Feichtinger, Vienna, Austria.
Enrico VaccariWunschbaby Institut Feichtinger, Vienna, Austria.
Ulrike MädelWunschbaby Institut Feichtinger, Vienna, Austria.
Franco LacconeInstitute of Medical Genetics, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Monika Stroh-WeigertWunschbaby Institut Feichtinger, Vienna, Austria.
Markus HengstschlägerWunschbaby Institut Feichtinger, Vienna, Austria; Institute of Medical Genetics, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Wilfried FeichtingerWunschbaby Institut Feichtinger, Vienna, Austria.
Jürgen NeesenInstitute of Medical Genetics, Medical University of Vienna, Vienna, Austria.
Wunschbaby Institut für Kinderwunsch · ATMedical University of Vienna · AT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Meiotic errors during oocyte maturation are considered the major contributors to embryonic aneuploidy and failures in human IVF treatment. Various technologies have been developed to screen polar bodies, blastomeres and trophectoderm cells for chromosomal aberrations. Array-CGH analysis using bacterial artificial chromosome (BAC) arrays is widely applied for preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) using single cells. Recently, an increase in the pregnancy rate has been demonstrated using array-CGH to evaluate trophectoderm cells. However, in some countries, the analysis of embryonic cells is restricted by law. Therefore, we used BAC array-CGH to assess the impact of polar body analysis on the live birth rate. A disadvantage of polar body aneuploidy screening is the necessity of the analysis of both the first and second polar bodies, resulting in increases in costs for the patient and complex data interpretation. Aneuploidy screening results may sometimes be ambiguous if the first and second polar bodies show reciprocal chromosomal aberrations. To overcome this disadvantage, we tested a strategy involving the pooling of DNA from both polar bodies before DNA amplification. We retrospectively studied 351 patients, of whom 111 underwent polar body array-CGH before embryo transfer. In the group receiving pooled polar body array-CGH (aCGH) analysis, 110 embryos were transferred, and 29 babies were born, corresponding to live birth rates of 26.4% per embryo and 35.7% per patient. In contrast, in the control group, the IVF treatment was performed without preimplantation genetic screening (PGS). For this group, 403 embryos were transferred, and 60 babies were born, resulting in live birth rates of 14.9% per embryo and 22.7% per patient. In conclusion, our data show that in the aCGH group, the use of aneuploidy screening resulted in a significantly higher live birth rate compared with the control group, supporting the benefit of PGS for IVF couples in addition to the suitability and effectiveness of our polar body pooling strategy.

Indexed as

Comparative Genomic HybridizationEmbryo TransferGenetic TestingLive BirthPolar BodiesPreimplantation DiagnosisAneuploidyCase-Control StudiesFemaleHumansPregnancy

Identifiers

PMID26024488
PMCPMC4449032
OpenAlexW1563963651

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.