Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30058577›Full record

ArticleChinese medical journal2018

Outcomes of Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis Cycles by Fluorescent

Chao Xu, Fang-Fang Zhang, Hong-Chang Li, Miao-Miao Wang, Yue-Ting Zhu, Wen-Jie Jiang, Yue Wang, Hao-Bo Zhang, Rong Tang, Gang Ma and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Chinese medical journal, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 31% 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

2 citing papers in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

11 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.

Chao XuCenter for Reproductive Medicine, Shandong University; National Research Center for Assisted Reproductive Technology and Reproductive Genetics; The Key Laboratory for Reproductive Endocrinology of Ministry of Education, Jinan, Shandong 250001; Department of Urology, Qilu Hospital of Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong 250012, China.
Fang-Fang ZhangCenter for Reproductive Medicine, Shandong University; National Research Center for Assisted Reproductive Technology and Reproductive Genetics; The Key Laboratory for Reproductive Endocrinology of Ministry of Education, Jinan, Shandong 250001, China.
Hong-Chang LiCenter for Reproductive Medicine, Shandong University; National Research Center for Assisted Reproductive Technology and Reproductive Genetics; The Key Laboratory for Reproductive Endocrinology of Ministry of Education, Jinan, Shandong 250001, China.
Miao-Miao WangCenter for Reproductive Medicine, Shandong University; National Research Center for Assisted Reproductive Technology and Reproductive Genetics; The Key Laboratory for Reproductive Endocrinology of Ministry of Education, Jinan, Shandong 250001, China.
Yue-Ting ZhuCenter for Reproductive Medicine, Shandong University; National Research Center for Assisted Reproductive Technology and Reproductive Genetics; The Key Laboratory for Reproductive Endocrinology of Ministry of Education, Jinan, Shandong 250001, China.
Wen-Jie JiangCenter for Reproductive Medicine, Shandong University; National Research Center for Assisted Reproductive Technology and Reproductive Genetics; The Key Laboratory for Reproductive Endocrinology of Ministry of Education, Jinan, Shandong 250001, China.
Yue WangCenter for Reproductive Medicine, Shandong University; National Research Center for Assisted Reproductive Technology and Reproductive Genetics; The Key Laboratory for Reproductive Endocrinology of Ministry of Education, Jinan, Shandong 250001, China.
Hao-Bo ZhangCenter for Reproductive Medicine, Shandong University; National Research Center for Assisted Reproductive Technology and Reproductive Genetics; The Key Laboratory for Reproductive Endocrinology of Ministry of Education, Jinan, Shandong 250001, China.
Rong TangNational Research Center for Assisted Reproductive Technology and Reproductive Genetics; The Key Laboratory for Reproductive Endocrinology of Ministry of Education; Center for Reproductive Medicine, Shandong Provincial Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University, Jinan, Shandong 250001, China.
Gang MaCenter for Reproductive Medicine, Shandong University; National Research Center for Assisted Reproductive Technology and Reproductive Genetics; The Key Laboratory for Reproductive Endocrinology of Ministry of Education, Jinan, Shandong 250001, China.
Jun-Hao YanCenter for Reproductive Medicine, Shandong University; National Research Center for Assisted Reproductive Technology and Reproductive Genetics; The Key Laboratory for Reproductive Endocrinology of Ministry of Education, Jinan, Shandong 250001, China.
Shandong University · CNQilu Hospital of Shandong University · CNShandong Provincial Hospital · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe 47,XYY syndrome could result in fertility problems. However, seldom studies reported comprehensive researches on the embryonic development and pregnancy outcomes of these patients. This study aimed to evaluate the clinical outcomes of nonmosaic 47,XYY patients performed with fluorescent in situ hybridization (FISH) and preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) treatment.

methodsThis was a retrospective study. Between January 2012 and May 2017, 51 infertile males with nonmosaic 47,XYY syndrome underwent FISH-PGD were included in the study. According to sex chromosomal FISH results, embryos were classified as normal signal, no nuclei fixed, no signal in fixed nuclei, suspensive signal, and abnormal signal groups, respectively. The incidence of each group, the fixation rate, and hybridization rate were calculated. Embryonic development and pregnancy outcomes were also analyzed. The measurement data were analyzed with Student's t-test. The comparison of categorical data was analyzed with the Chi-square test and Fisher's exact test when expected cell count was <5.

resultsThe 53 PGD cycles with 433 embryos were analyzed. The fixation rate was 89.6%, while the hybridization rate was 96.4%. There were 283 embryos with two sex chromosomal signals with clear diagnosis (65.4%). The numbers of no nuclei fixed, no signal in fixed nuclei, suspensive signal, and abnormal signal groups were 45 (10.4%), 14 (3.2%), 24 (5.5%), and 67 (15.5%), respectively. Embryos with abnormal signals were abandoned. The number of good-quality embryos was 210 (57.4%), including implanted embryos on day 4/day 5 and cryopreserved. The rates of good-quality embryos in the no nuclei fixed (22.2%), no signal in fixed nuclei (28.6%), and suspensive signal groups (33.3%) were comparable (P > 0.05), and were significantly lower than the normal signal group (66.4%, P < 0.001). The clinical pregnancy rates of fresh and frozen embryos transferred cycles were 70.6% and 85.7%, respectively.

conclusionsAmong embryos with a clear diagnosis of sex chromosome, about one-fifth showed abnormal signals. Embryos with two sex chromosomal signals are more likely to develop into good-quality ones. The application of the PGD by FISH may help to improve the clinical outcome s.

Indexed as

In Situ Hybridization, FluorescencePreimplantation DiagnosisFemaleHumansInfertility, MaleMalePregnancyRetrospective StudiesSex Chromosome DisordersXYY Karyotype47Fluorescent In situ HybridizationInfertilityPregnancy OutcomePreimplantation Genetic DiagnosisXYY Syndrome

Identifiers

PMID30058577
PMCPMC6071452
OpenAlexW2883038022

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.