Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38482262›Full record

ArticleBalkan journal of medical genetics : BJMG2023

Preimplantation Genetic Testing within the Public Healthcare System in Slovenia.

M Volk, K Writzl, A Veble, H Jaklič, N Teran, B Prosenc, M Štimpfel, I Virant Klun, E Vrtačnik Bokal, H Ban Frangež and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Balkan journal of medical genetics : BJMG, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 23% 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

0 citing papers in PubMed, 1 citations in OpenAlex.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

11 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

M VolkClinical Institute of Genomic Medicine, University Medical Centre Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
K WritzlClinical Institute of Genomic Medicine, University Medical Centre Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
A VebleClinical Institute of Genomic Medicine, University Medical Centre Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
H JakličClinical Institute of Genomic Medicine, University Medical Centre Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
N TeranClinical Institute of Genomic Medicine, University Medical Centre Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
B ProsencClinical Institute of Genomic Medicine, University Medical Centre Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
M ŠtimpfelDepartment of Human Reproduction, Division of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, University Medical Centre Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
I Virant KlunClinical Research Centre, University Medical Centre Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
E Vrtačnik BokalDepartment of Human Reproduction, Division of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, University Medical Centre Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
H Ban FrangežDepartment of Human Reproduction, Division of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, University Medical Centre Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
B PeterlinClinical Institute of Genomic Medicine, University Medical Centre Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia.
Ljubljana University Medical Centre · SI

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) is the earliest form of prenatal diagnosis that has become an established procedure for couples at risk of passing a severe genetic disease to their offspring. At UMC Ljubljana, we conducted a retrospective register-based study to present 15 years of PGT service within the public healthcare system in Slovenia. We collected the data of the PGT cycles from 2004 to 2019 and compared clinical outcomes for chromosomal and monogenic diseases using different embryo biopsy and testing approaches. In addition, we assessed the extent to which PGT has become the preferred option compared to classic prenatal diagnostics. We treated 211 couples, 110 with single gene disorder, 88 with structural chromosome rearrangement and 13 for numerical chromosome aberration. There were 375 PGT cycles with oocyte retrieval, while embryo transfer was possible in 263 cases resulting in 78 deliveries and 84 children. Altogether, the clinical pregnancy rate per embryo transfer was 31% in 2004-2016 (blastomere biopsy) and 43% in 2017-19 (blastocyst biopsy), respectively. We assessed that approximately a third of couples would opt for PGT, while the rest preferred natural conception with prenatal diagnosis. Our results show that providing a PGT service within the public healthcare system has become a considerable option in pregnancy planning for couples at risk of transmitting a severe genetic disease to their offspring. In Slovenia, approximately a third of couples would opt for PGT. Although the number of cycles is small, our clinical results are comparable to larger centres.

Indexed as

chromosome aberrationembryo biopsyin vitro fertilizationmonogenic diseasepreimplantation genetic testing

Identifiers

PMID38482262
PMCPMC10932602
OpenAlexW4392683344

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.