ReviewThe application of clinical genetics2021
Genetic Testing for Aneuploidy in Patients Who Have Had Multiple Miscarriages: A Review of Current Literature.
Review in The application of clinical genetics, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 29 citations in OpenAlex.
- Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy optimizes reproductive outcomes in recurrent reproductive failure: a systematic review.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Pooled it
- The impact of preimplantation genetic testing on the quality of life of people undergoing assisted reproduction treatment.Scientific reports · 2026Observational
- Quantity down, quality preserved: a continuous HOMA-IR analysis of IVF/ICSI outcomes in PMOS patients.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
- Screening Positive for Rare Autosomal Aneuploidies Increases Frequency of Adverse Pregnancy Outcomes and Alters Clinical Management.Prenatal diagnosis · 2025Article
- ARHGAP26 deficiency drives the oocyte aneuploidy and early embryonic development failure.Cell death and differentiation · 2025Article
- Article
- Clinically significant findings in a decade-long retrospective study of prenatal chromosomal microarray testing.Molecular genetics & genomic medicine · 2024Review
- Before Is Better: Innovative Multidisciplinary Preconception Care in Different Clinical Contexts.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- Investigating the "Fetal Side" in Recurrent Pregnancy Loss: Reliability of Cell-Free DNA Testing in Detecting Chromosomal Abnormalities of Miscarriage Tissue.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- ESHRE good practice recommendations on recurrent implantation failure.Human reproduction open · 2023Article
- CRISPR/Cas9 genome editing to create nonhuman primate models for studying stem cell therapies for HIV infection.Retrovirology · 2022Review
- Editorial: Emerging New Tests and Their Impact Upon the Practice of Reproductive Genetics.Frontiers in genetics · 2021Article
- Chromosomal abnormalities in couples with recurrent pregnancy loss: a 16-year cross-sectional study of 4030 cases from Turkey.Annals of Saudi medicineArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL) is an obstetrical complication that affects about 3% of reproductive age couples. Genetic and non-genetic causes of RPL are multiple; however, aneuploidy is the most common obstetrical complication that can explain single and recurrent pregnancy loss (present in about 60% of recognized clinical pregnancies which result in a miscarriage). Parental karyotyping will only be of potential benefit for 2 to 5 percentage of RPL couples who are translocation carriers. Products of conception (POC) karyotype analysis has been used to direct management in RPL and has been shown to be cost-effective, but the technique has many limitations including high culture failure rate and maternal cell contamination. These limitations can be significantly reduced using POC chromosomal microarray (CMA) technology. We believe that POC genetic testing should be performed after the second and subsequent pregnancy loss using CMA. Although the results will not generally alter the course of treatment, the knowledge of the reason for the loss is of great emotional comfort to many patients. In addition, POC CMA performed in conjunction with a regular complete maternal RPL work-up will identify the group of truly unexplained RPL. Thus, only 10% of patients with RPL will complete an evaluation having a euploid loss and an otherwise normal work-up. This group of "truly unexplained RPL" would be ideal for new research trials and therapies. Pre-implantation genetic testing (PGT) technology has improved recently with day 5 trophectoderm biopsy as compared to biopsy on day 3 as well as with the addition of CMA and next-generation sequencing technologies. The most recent studies on PGT-SR (PGT-Structural rearrangement) show improved clinical and live birth rates per pregnancy, as well as decreased miscarriage rate for translocation carriers. PGT-A (PGT-aneuploidy) may have a limited role in RPL in cases with documented recurrent POC aneuploidy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.