ArticleContraception and reproductive medicine2026
Complex chromosomal rearrangements induce embryonic chromosomal imbalance and significantly compromise reproductive outcomes.
Article in Contraception and reproductive medicine, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
16 authors.
Funding
Abstract
This study evaluated Preimplantation Genetic Testing for Structural Rearrangements (PGT‑SR) outcomes in carriers of complex chromosomal rearrangements (CCRs). Four CCR couples underwent PGT‑SR, and 20 karyotypically normal couples underwent Preimplantation Genetic Testing for Aneuploidy (PGT‑A) as controls. Embryo biopsies were analyzed by next‑generation sequencing (NGS), and Mapping Allele with Resolved Carrier Status (MaReCs) was used for breakpoint mapping. Literature data from 31 additional CCR carriers (222 embryos) were also summarized. Among the four CCR couples in this study, 14 blastocysts were biopsied. The high‑quality blastocyst rate (57.1%, 8/14) and euploidy rate (14.29%, 2/14) were significantly lower than in controls (71.5% and 42.37%, respectively; P < 0.05). In the literature cohort of 222 embryos, for CCR types A (three‑way), B (double two‑way), and C (exceptional), the high‑quality blastocyst rates (37.50%, 44.44%, and 32.91%) and chromosomal abnormality rates (86.25%, 92.06%, and 88.61%) showed no significant differences; the overall euploidy rate (11.26%) was significantly lower than that in the PGT‑A control group (42.37%, P < 0.001). In conclusion, CCR carriers show impaired embryonic potential and markedly lower euploidy rates. While Type B CCR embryos have good morphology, their genetic normality is extremely poor, ruling out morphology-only selection. Instead, PGT-SR combined with high-resolution breakpoint mapping is required to reliably identify viable embryos for healthy pregnancy.
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.