ArticleReproductive medicine and biology
The effects of differences in trophectoderm biopsy techniques and the number of cells collected for biopsy on next-generation sequencing results.
Article in Reproductive medicine and biology. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Healthy newborn delivered after very high segmental mosaic embryo transfer- a case report.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2026Article
- Embryos With "No Result" After PGT-A: A Retrospective Analysis of Causative Factors.Obstetrics and gynecology international · 2025Article
- Should embryo rebiopsy be considered a regular strategy to increase the number of embryos available for transfer?Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2023Article
- The effects of differences in trophectoderm biopsy techniques and the number of cells collected for biopsy on next-generation sequencing results.Reproductive medicine and biologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: To examine how differences in trophectoderm biopsy techniques affect the frequency of mosaic embryos and sequencing results. Methods: We examined differences in next-generation sequencing (NGS) analysis results among operators or according to biopsy technique. Additionally, we determined the cut-off for the number of collected cells to predict the occurrence of mosaicism. We collected cells according to the cut-off value and examined whether there was a difference in the NGS analysis results between the pulling and flicking methods. Results: There was no difference in the NGS analysis results among the operators. Regarding re-biopsy, changes in the mosaic were observed in all specimens. The cut-off value for the number of collected cells was five, and when more than five cells were collected, there was no difference in the NGS analysis results between the two methods. Conclusions: We demonstrated that if trophectoderm biopsy techniques and NGS are stable, the cell collection location has a greater effect on NGS results than the biopsy technique.
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.