Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32082528›Full record

ArticleFacts, views & vision in ObGyn2019

Thaw, biopsy and refreeze strategy for PGT-A on previously cryopreserved embryos.

M Wilding, M Terribile, I Parisi, G Nargund

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Facts, views & vision in ObGyn, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

4 authors.

M WildingCreate fertility, 150 Cheapside, LondonEC2V 6ET, United Kingdom.
M TerribileCreate fertility, 150 Cheapside, LondonEC2V 6ET, United Kingdom.
I ParisiCreate fertility, 150 Cheapside, LondonEC2V 6ET, United Kingdom.
G NargundCreate fertility, 150 Cheapside, LondonEC2V 6ET, United Kingdom.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPreimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) with Next Generation Sequencing technology is a low-cost and powerful technology for the analysis of embryo quality. However, PGT-A requires freezing of embryos, suggesting that previously cryopreserved embryos cannot be tested. Here, we test whether use of the vitrification technique permits the refreezing of embryos, thus permitting PGT-A testing of cryopreserved embryos.

methodsThe results are a retrospective analysis of cases performed at Create fertility between 2016 and 2017. Results obtained after traditional PGT-A are compared with results after the thaw biopsy and refreeze (TBR) procedure. A total of 220 patients were treated with PGT-A and 54 patients with the TBR procedure.

resultsMaternal ages were not significantly different between the groups. The proportion of PGT-A normal embryos was not significantly different between the two groups. A clinical pregnancy rate of 61.5% was achieved with the PGT-A group and 52.4% with the TBR group. These results were not statistically significant. The efficiency of the thaw, biopsy and refreeze technique was not significantly different to that of fresh cycles for rates of survival, results obtained and aneuploidy incidence. Clinical pregnancy rates are not significantly different after the biopsy of fresh and previously cryopreserved embryos.

conclusionThe data shows that the TBR procedure has an equivalent success rate to that of classical PGT-A procedures.

Indexed as

aneuploidyembryo biopsyembryo cryopreservationembryo qualityembryo refreezingPGT-A

Identifiers

PMID32082528
PMCPMC7020945

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.