Skip to main content

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Endocrinol.
Sec. Reproduction
Volume 15 - 2024 | doi: 10.3389/fendo.2024.1441014
This article is part of the Research Topic Advances in the Study of the Developmental Process and Gene State of Gametes and Embryos View all articles

Feasibility of Preimplantation Genetic Testing for Aneuploidy on Frozen-Thawed Embryos Following Conventional IVF Insemination

Provisionally accepted
Xiaojun Wen Xiaojun Wen Zhiming Li Zhiming Li Lizi Cheng Lizi Cheng *Junye Huo Junye Huo *Wenjuan Yu Wenjuan Yu *Zhanhui Ou Zhanhui Ou NengQing Liu NengQing Liu Jieliang Li Jieliang Li *Xiaowu Fang Xiaowu Fang *Xiufeng Lin Xiufeng Lin *
  • Reproductive Medicine Center, Boai Hospital of Zhongshan, Zhongshan, China

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

    Objective: Intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) is commonly employed in preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) to minimize the risk of foreign sperm DNA contamination. Cryopreserved embryos from patients with recurrent miscarriage or repeated implantation failure, who have undergone conventional in vitro fertilization (IVF), can be thawed and biopsied for PGT. Therefore, we aimed to assess the accuracy and effectiveness of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) on frozen embryos using conventional IVF (c-IVF) insemination methods.Methods: From January 2021 to November 2023, our center conducted 107 thawed cryopreserved embryo biopsy cycles to screen for PGT-A. Among them, 58 cycles used c-IVF insemination, and 49 used ICSI insemination. Basic patient clinical information, laboratory data, PGT test results, and clinical outcome data were collected. To minimize the confounding effects of patient characteristics and embryo quality on PGT-A outcomes, clinical outcomes, and contamination assessment, these variables were included in the analysis. We then evaluated the blastocyst euploidy rate, clinical outcomes, and accuracy of PGT-A results between the two groups and analyzed potential contamination in the c-IVF insemination group.Results: A total of 320 blastocysts underwent PGT-A testing, with 179 blastocysts from c-IVF insemination and 141 from ICSI insemination. Considering participants' baseline characteristics and embryological outcomes, no significant differences were found between the two groups regarding infertility type, average age, body mass index, percentage of PGT-A indications, or quality of embryonic development. Regarding PGT-A results, all 320 biopsy samples were successfully analyzed, showing no statistical variance in chromosomal euploidy, abnormality, or mosaicism rates between the two insemination methods. No parental contamination was detected in the c-IVF insemination group. When assessing clinical outcomes, parameters such as biochemical pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, and miscarriage rates did not exhibit significant discrepancies between the two groups, and no misdiagnoses were reported during the study period.Embryo transfer and PGT-A results are not affected by potential parental contamination in frozen-thawed embryos conceived via c-IVF. PGT-A guided embryo transfer in thawed embryos conceived by c-IVF is a viable and clinically effective approach.

    Keywords: PGT-A, conventional IVF insemination, ICSI, Frozen-thawed embryos, Biopsy, parental contamination

    Received: 30 May 2024; Accepted: 30 Aug 2024.

    Copyright: © 2024 Wen, Li, Cheng, Huo, Yu, Ou, Liu, Li, Fang and Lin. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

    * Correspondence:
    Lizi Cheng, Reproductive Medicine Center, Boai Hospital of Zhongshan, Zhongshan, China
    Junye Huo, Reproductive Medicine Center, Boai Hospital of Zhongshan, Zhongshan, China
    Wenjuan Yu, Reproductive Medicine Center, Boai Hospital of Zhongshan, Zhongshan, China
    Jieliang Li, Reproductive Medicine Center, Boai Hospital of Zhongshan, Zhongshan, China
    Xiaowu Fang, Reproductive Medicine Center, Boai Hospital of Zhongshan, Zhongshan, China
    Xiufeng Lin, Reproductive Medicine Center, Boai Hospital of Zhongshan, Zhongshan, China

    Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.