↓ Skip to main content

A pilot proof-of-principle study to compare fresh and vitrified cycle preimplantation genetic screening by chromosome microarray and next generation sequencing

Overview of attention for article published in Molecular Cytogenetics, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#46 of 402)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (66th percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (66th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
2 X users
facebook
9 Facebook pages
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
15 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
36 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A pilot proof-of-principle study to compare fresh and vitrified cycle preimplantation genetic screening by chromosome microarray and next generation sequencing
Published in
Molecular Cytogenetics, March 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13039-016-0238-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Gwo-Chin Ma, Hsin-Fu Chen, Yu-Shih Yang, Wen-Hsiang Lin, Feng-Po Tsai, Chi-Fang Lin, Chi Chiu, Ming Chen

Abstract

Single embryo transfer (SET) has been utilized as a strategy to reduce the chance of multifetal gestations in in vitro fertilization (IVF) but lower pregnancy rate remains a concern. Recent studies showed that favorable outcome regarding SET can be achieved by selecting embryos with "more normal" genetic components. We explored the use of rapid array comparative genomic hybridization (aCGH) to select blastocysts for fresh SET and compared with the protocols adopting vitrified (ultrarapidly frozen) embryo transfer cycle. Validation of the rapid protocol of aCGH and comparison of the result with the regular protocol of aCGH and next generation sequencing (NGS) are also performed. First-time IVF patients with normal karyotype (n = 21) were enrolled for elective fresh SET cycle (n = 8; designated as fresh SET group) or vitrified embryo transfer cycle (n = 13; designated as vitrified ET group) coupling with comprehensive chromosomal screening by a 9-h rapid aCGH from Day 5 trophectoderm (TE) biopsy. In fresh SET group, 86 blastocysts (10.8 blastocysts/patient) were biopsied and analyzed. Aneuploidy was detected in 53.5 % (46/86) of the biopsied blastocysts. All patients had a single embryo transferred on the following day. The clinical pregnancy rate was 87.5 % (7/8) and the ongoing pregnancy rate was 62.5 % (5/8). In vitrified ET group, 58 blastocysts (4.5 blastocysts/patient) were biopsied and 56 blastocysts were analyzed. Aneuploidy was detected in 39.3 % (22/56) of biopsies. The patients accepted for SET or double embryos transfer (DET) in non-stimulated cycles. The clinical pregnancy rate and the ongoing pregnancy rate was 76.9 % (10/13) and 53.8 % (7/13) respectively. Spontaneous abortions occurred in both of the two patient groups. In the series of fresh SET group, no twin pregnancy was noted and at least one healthy baby had been born at gestational age (GA) 37(+6) weeks when submission. The results of PGS by rapid aCGH, regular aCGH and NGS were comparable in most occasions. This study evaluates the use of rapid aCGH to select blastocysts for fresh SET and demonstrates its feasibility in a real clinical IVF program. A successful livebirth is achieved and the favorable outcome is superior to the protocol adopting vitrified ET cycle in our own setting. Additional studies are needed to verify this pilot data and validate its application in large randomized trials.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 36 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 36 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 6 17%
Other 4 11%
Student > Master 4 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 4 11%
Professor 3 8%
Other 8 22%
Unknown 7 19%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 12 33%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 6 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 3 8%
Nursing and Health Professions 3 8%
Unspecified 1 3%
Other 3 8%
Unknown 8 22%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 29 November 2021.
All research outputs
#6,970,683
of 22,856,968 outputs
Outputs from Molecular Cytogenetics
#46
of 402 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,380
of 299,504 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Molecular Cytogenetics
#3
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,856,968 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 68th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 402 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.4. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 299,504 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 66% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 6 of them.