Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37737174›Full record

ArticleReproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E2023

Cleavage-stage or blastocyst-stage embryo biopsy has no impact on growth and health in children up to 2 years of age.

Florence Belva, Fiskani Kondowe, Anick De Vos, Kathelijn Keymolen, Andrea Buysse, Frederik Hes, Veerle Berckmoes, Pieter Verdyck, Willem Verpoest, Martine De Rycke

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. 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

10 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Florence BelvaVrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel (UZ Brussel), Clinical Sciences, Research Group Reproduction and Genetics, Centre for Medical Genetics, Brussels, Belgium. Florence.belva@uzbrussel.be.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-2358-8014
Fiskani KondoweCentre for Biostatistics, Division of Population Health, Health Services Research & Primary Care, School of Health Sciences, Faculty of Biology, Medicine and Health, The University of Manchester, Manchester Academic Health Science Centre, Manchester, UK.
Anick De VosVrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel (UZ Brussel), Clinical Sciences, Research Group Reproduction and Genetics, Brussels IVF Centre for Reproductive Medicine, Brussels, Belgium.
Kathelijn KeymolenVrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel (UZ Brussel), Clinical Sciences, Research Group Reproduction and Genetics, Centre for Medical Genetics, Brussels, Belgium.
Andrea BuysseVrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel (UZ Brussel), Clinical Sciences, Research Group Reproduction and Genetics, Centre for Medical Genetics, Brussels, Belgium.
Frederik HesVrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel (UZ Brussel), Clinical Sciences, Research Group Reproduction and Genetics, Centre for Medical Genetics, Brussels, Belgium.
Veerle BerckmoesVrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel (UZ Brussel), Clinical Sciences, Research Group Reproduction and Genetics, Centre for Medical Genetics, Brussels, Belgium.
Pieter VerdyckVrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel (UZ Brussel), Clinical Sciences, Research Group Reproduction and Genetics, Centre for Medical Genetics, Brussels, Belgium.
Willem VerpoestVrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel (UZ Brussel), Clinical Sciences, Research Group Reproduction and Genetics, Brussels IVF Centre for Reproductive Medicine, Brussels, Belgium.
Martine De RyckeVrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel (UZ Brussel), Clinical Sciences, Research Group Reproduction and Genetics, Centre for Medical Genetics, Brussels, Belgium.
Vrije Universiteit Brussel · BEManchester Academic Health Science Centre · GB

Funding

EU H2020 Marie Sklodowska-Curie Innovative Training Networks (ITN) grant DohART-NET H2020-MSCA-ITN-2018 -812660
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundStudies show conflicting results on neonatal outcomes following embryo biopsy for PGT, primarily due to small sample sizes and/or heterogeneity in the timing of embryo biopsy (day 3; EBD3 or day 5/6; EBD5) and type of embryo transfer. Even fewer data exist on the impact on children's health beyond the neonatal period. This study aimed to explore outcomes in children born after EBD3 or EBD5 followed by fresh (FRESH) or frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET).

methodsThis single-centre cohort study compared birth data of 630 children after EBD3, of 222 EBD5 and of 1532 after non-biopsied embryo transfers performed between 2014 and 2018. Follow-up data on growth were available for 426, 131 and 662 children, respectively.

resultsEmbryo biopsy, either at EBD3 or EBD5 in FET and FRESH cycles did not negatively affect anthropometry at birth, infancy or childhood compared to outcomes in non-biopsied FET and FRESH cycles. While there was no adverse effect of the timing of embryo biopsy (EBD3 versus EBD5), children born after EBD3 followed by FET had larger sizes at birth, but not thereafter, than children born after EBD3 followed by FRESH. Reassuringly, weight and height gain, proportions of major congenital malformations, developmental problems, hospital admissions and surgical interventions were similar between comparison groups.

conclusionOur study indicated that neither EBD3 nor EBD5 followed by FRESH or FET had a negative impact on anthropometry and on health outcomes up to 2 years of age.

Indexed as

BlastocystEmbryo, MammalianAnthropometryBiopsyChildCohort StudiesHumansInfant, NewbornBlastocystChildrenCleavageEmbryo biopsyHealthPGT

Identifiers

PMID37737174
PMCPMC10515414
OpenAlexW4386945180

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.