ArticleHuman reproduction open2022
ESHRE survey results and good practice recommendations on managing chromosomal mosaicism.
Article in Human reproduction open, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 4 of them syntheses 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
43 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Global research trends in embryonic mosaicism and mosaic embryo transfer: a bibliometric and science-mapping analysis.Frontiers in medicine · 2026Pooled it
- Prenatal diagnosis following preimplantation genetic testing (PGT): recommendations of the Italian Society of Human Genetics (SIGU).Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2025Guideline
- A systematic review and meta-analysis of the diagnostic accuracy after preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy.PloS one · 2025Pooled it
- Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy optimizes reproductive outcomes in recurrent reproductive failure: a systematic review.Frontiers in medicine · 2024Pooled it
- "Old and new" frontiers in embryo viability assessment: current practices and introduction of emerging approaches.Biology of reproduction · 2026Review
- ESHRE PGT Consortium data collection XXII-XXIV: PGT analyses from 2019 to 2021†.Human reproduction (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
- Healthy newborn delivered after very high segmental mosaic embryo transfer- a case report.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2026Article
- Diverging guidelines and consensus statements on preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy: indications and strategies reviewed.Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E · 2026Review
- Assessing concordance of genetic parameters between trophectoderm and inner cell mass in morphologically scored day-5 embryos via NGS.Reproduction & fertility · 2026Article
- Risk factors associated with meiotic errors in blastocysts with mosaic results on biopsy.Human reproduction open · 2026Article
- Cumulative live birth following preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy versus conventional IVF/ICSI in unexplained recurrent pregnancy loss: a retrospective cohort study with intention-to-treat and per-protocol analyses.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
- Reclaiming 'abnormal' embryos after preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy: patients' perspectives on transferring embryos against prior institutional advice.Human reproduction open · 2026Article
- Article
- Approximate Bayesian computation supports a high incidence of chromosomal mosaicism in blastocyst-stage human embryos.Genetics · 2025Article
- Validation of non-invasive preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies (niPGT-A) in a Japanese population: experience from seven clinics.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2025Article
- Review
- Impact of PGT Introduction on IVF Laboratory Workload: Lessons Learned from a Single-Center Experience of 5258 Biopsies over a 10-Year Period.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Rescuing Fertilization Failure in ICSI: A Narrative Review of Calcium Ionophore Activation, PLCζ Testing, and Embryo Morphokinetics.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Evaluation of the Effectiveness and Accuracy of Non-Invasive Preimplantation Genetic Testing (niPGT) Compared to Invasive Embryo Biopsy.Biomedicines · 2025Review
- Approximate Bayesian computation supports a high incidence of chromosomal mosaicism in blastocyst-stage human embryos.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
study questionHow should ART/preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) centres manage the detection of chromosomal mosaicism following PGT? SUMMARY ANSWER: Thirty good practice recommendations were formulated that can be used by ART/PGT centres as a basis for their own policy with regards to the management of 'mosaic' embryos. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: The use of comprehensive chromosome screening technologies has provided a variety of data on the incidence of chromosomal mosaicism at the preimplantation stage of development and evidence is accumulating that clarifies the clinical outcomes after transfer of embryos with putative mosaic results, with regards to implantation, miscarriage and live birth rates, and neonatal outcomes. STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION: This document was developed according to a predefined methodology for ESHRE good practice recommendations. Recommendations are supported by data from the literature, a large survey evaluating current practice and published guidance documents. The literature search was performed using PubMed and focused on studies published between 2010 and 2022. The survey was performed through a web-based questionnaire distributed to members of the ESHRE special interest groups (SIG) Reproductive Genetics and Embryology, and the ESHRE PGT Consortium members. It included questions on ART and PGT, reporting, embryo transfer policy and follow-up of transfers. The final dataset represents 239 centres. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING
methodsThe working group (WG) included 16 members with expertise on the ART/PGT process and chromosomal mosaicism. The recommendations for clinical practice were formulated based on the expert opinion of the WG, while taking into consideration the published data and results of the survey. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Eighty percent of centres that biopsy three or more cells report mosaicism, even though only 66.9% of all centres have validated their technology and only 61.8% of these have validated specifically for the calling of chromosomal mosaicism. The criteria for designating mosaicism, reporting and transfer policies vary significantly across the centres replying to the survey. The WG formulated recommendations on how to manage the detection of chromosomal mosaicism in clinical practice, considering validation, risk assessment, designating and reporting mosaicism, embryo transfer policies, prenatal testing and follow-up. Guidance is also provided on the essential elements that should constitute the consent forms and the genetic report, and that should be covered in genetic counselling. As there are several unknowns in chromosomal mosaicism, it is recommended that PGT centres monitor emerging data on the topic and adapt or refine their policy whenever new insights are available from evidence. LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION: Rather than providing instant standardized advice, the recommendations should help ART/PGT centres in developing their own policy towards the management of putative mosaic embryos in clinical practice. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE
findingsThis document will help facilitate a more knowledge-based approach for dealing with chromosomal mosaicism in different centres. In addition to recommendations for clinical practice, recommendations for future research were formulated. Following up on these will direct research towards existing research gaps with direct translation to clinical practice. Emerging data will help in improving guidance, and a more evidence-based approach of managing chromosomal mosaicism. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: The WG received technical support from ESHRE. M.D.R. participated in the EQA special advisory group, outside the submitted work, and is the chair of the PGT WG of the Belgian society for human genetics. D.W. declared receiving salary from Juno Genetics, UK. A.C. is an employee of Igenomix, Italy and C.R. is an employee of Igenomix, Spain. C.S. received a research grant from FWO, Belgium, not related to the submitted work. I.S. declared being a Co-founder of IVFvision Ltd, UK. J.R.V. declared patents related to 'Methods for haplotyping single-cells' and 'Haplotyping and copy number typing using polymorphic variant allelic frequencies', and being a board member of Preimplantation Genetic Diagnosis International Society (PGDIS) and International Society for Prenatal Diagnosis (ISPD). K.S. reported being Chair-elect of ESHRE. The other authors had nothing to disclose. DISCLAIMER:
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.