Book contents
- Principles of IVF Laboratory Practice
- Principles of IVF Laboratory Practice
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Contributors
- Foreword
- Preface
- Section 1 Starting a New Laboratory and Training Protocols
- Section 2 Pre-Procedure Protocols
- Section 3 Gametes
- Section 4 Insemination/ICSI
- Section 5 Fertilization Assessment
- Section 6 Embryo Assessment
- Section 7 Embryo Cryopreservation
- Section 8 Embryo Biopsy
- Chapter 36 Embryo Biopsy by Laser on Day 5 in the IVF Laboratory
- Section 9 Embryo Transfer
- Section 10 Quality Management
- Index
- PDF Only
- References
Chapter 36 - Embryo Biopsy by Laser on Day 5 in the IVF Laboratory
from Section 8 - Embryo Biopsy
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 May 2017
By
Book contents
- Principles of IVF Laboratory Practice
- Principles of IVF Laboratory Practice
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Contributors
- Foreword
- Preface
- Section 1 Starting a New Laboratory and Training Protocols
- Section 2 Pre-Procedure Protocols
- Section 3 Gametes
- Section 4 Insemination/ICSI
- Section 5 Fertilization Assessment
- Section 6 Embryo Assessment
- Section 7 Embryo Cryopreservation
- Section 8 Embryo Biopsy
- Chapter 36 Embryo Biopsy by Laser on Day 5 in the IVF Laboratory
- Section 9 Embryo Transfer
- Section 10 Quality Management
- Index
- PDF Only
- References
Summary
A summary is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Principles of IVF Laboratory PracticeOptimizing Performance and Outcomes, pp. 245 - 252Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2017
References
Dokras, A., Sargent, I. L., Ross, C., Gardner, R. L. and Barlow, D. H. Trophectoderm biopsy in human blastocysts. Hum Reprod 1990; 5:821–5.Google Scholar
Kokkali, G., Vrettou, C., Traeger-Synodinos, J., Jones, G. M., Cram, D. S. et al. Birth of a healthy infant following trophectoderm biopsy from blastocysts for PGD of beta-thalassaemia major. Hum Reprod 2005; 20:1855–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McArthur, S. J., Leigh, D., Marshall, J. T., de Boer, K. A. and Jansen, R. P. Pregnancies and live births after trophectoderm biopsy and preimplantation genetic testing of human embryos. Fertil Steril 2005; 84:1628–36.Google Scholar
McArthur, S. J., Leigh, D., Marshall, J. T., Gee, A. J., De Boer, K. A. et al. Blastocyst trophectoderm biopsy and preimplantation genetic diagnosis for familial monogenic disorders and chromosomal translocations. Prenat Diagn 2008; 28:434–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Scott, R. T., Upham, K. M., Forman, E. J., Zhao, T. and Treff, N. R. Cleavage-stage biopsy significantly impairs human embryonic implantation potential while blastocyst biopsy does not: a randomized and paired clinical trial. Fertil Steril 2013; 100:624–30.Google Scholar
Franasiak, J. M., Forman, E. J., Hong, K. H., Werner, M. D., Upham, K. M. et al. The nature of aneuploidy with increasing age of the female partner: a review of 15,169 consecutive trophectoderm biopsies evaluated with comprehensive chromosomal screening. Fertil Steril 2014; 101:656–63.Google Scholar
Capalbo, A., Rienzi, L., Cimandomo, D., Maggiulli, R., Elliott, T. et al. Correlation between standard blastocyst morphology, euploidy and implantation: an observational study in two centers involving 956 screened blastocysts. Hum Reprod 2014; 29:1173–81.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gleicher, N., Kushnir, V. A. and Barad, D. H. Preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) still in search of a clinical application: a systematic review. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2014; 12:22.Google Scholar
Lee, E., Illingworth, P., Wilton, L. and Chambers, G. M. The clinical effectiveness of preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidy in all 24 chromosomes (PGD-A): systematic review. Hum Reprod 2015; 30:473–83.Google Scholar
Harper, J. C., Wilton, L., Traeger-Synodinos, J., Goossens, V., Moutou, C. et al. The ESHRE PGD Consortium: 10 years of data collection. Hum Reprod Update 2012; 18:234–47.Google Scholar
De Rycke, M., Belva, F., Goossens, V., Moutou, C., SenGupta, S. B. et al. ESHRE PGD Consortium data collection XIII: cycles from January to December 2010 with pregnancy follow-up to October 2011. Hum Reprod 2015; 30:1763–89.Google Scholar
Fragouli, E., Katz-Jaffe, M., Alfarawati, S., Stevens, J., Colls, P. et al. Comprehensive chromosome screening of polar bodies and blastocysts from couples experiencing repeated implantation failure. Fertil Steril 2010; 94:875–87.Google Scholar
Yang, Z., Liu, J., Collins, G. S., Salem, A. S., Liu, X. et al. Selection of single blastocysts for fresh transfer via standard morphology assessment alone and with array CGH for good prognosis IVF patients: results from a randomized pilot study. Mol Cytogenet 2012; 5:24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gardner, D. K., Lane, M., Stevens, J., Schenkler, T. and Schoolcraft, W. B. Blastocyst score affects implantation and pregnancy outcome: towards a single blastocyst transfer. Fertil Steril 2000; 73:1155–8.Google Scholar
Van Landuyt, L., Stoop, D., Verheyen, G., Verpoest, W., Camus, M. et al. Outcome of closed blastocyst vitrification in relation to blastocyst quality: evaluation of 759 warming cycles in a single-embryo transfer policy. Hum Reprod 2011; 26:527–34.Google Scholar