International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2016
Clinical outcomes for couples containing a reciprocal chromosome translocation carrier without preimplantation genetic diagnosis.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Yin Biao, Zhu Yuanchang, Wu Tonghua, Shen Shuqiu, Zeng Yong, Liang Desheng
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the pregnancy outcomes of couples containing a carrier of a reciprocal chromosome translocation (RCT) after assisted reproductive technology without preimplantation genetic diagnosis.
METHODS: A retrospective study was performed using data for couples with an RCT carrier and control couples with a normal karyotype (1:4 ratio) who underwent assisted reproductive technology cycles at a Chinese fertility center in 2010-2011. The embryos were fertilized via in vitro fertilization (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). Only the first pick-up cycles were used for analysis. Clinical variables were compared.
RESULTS: Compared with the control group (n=164), the RCT group (n=41) had a marginally lower clinical pregnancy rate (46.3% [19/41] vs 54.3% [89/164]), implantation rate (21.7% [23/106] vs 26.9% [118/438]), multiple-gestation pregnancy rate (21.1% [4/19] vs 32.6% [29/89]), and delivery rate (36.6% [15/41] vs 47.6% [78/164]), whereas the spontaneous abortion rate was slightly higher (21.1% [4/19] vs 12.4% [11/89]). However, none of these differences were significant.
CONCLUSION: The clinical outcomes for RCT carriers were acceptable after IVF/ICSI without performing preimplantation genetic diagnosis, indicating that this approach might comprise a feasible alternative fertility treatment for RCT carriers.
METHODS: A retrospective study was performed using data for couples with an RCT carrier and control couples with a normal karyotype (1:4 ratio) who underwent assisted reproductive technology cycles at a Chinese fertility center in 2010-2011. The embryos were fertilized via in vitro fertilization (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). Only the first pick-up cycles were used for analysis. Clinical variables were compared.
RESULTS: Compared with the control group (n=164), the RCT group (n=41) had a marginally lower clinical pregnancy rate (46.3% [19/41] vs 54.3% [89/164]), implantation rate (21.7% [23/106] vs 26.9% [118/438]), multiple-gestation pregnancy rate (21.1% [4/19] vs 32.6% [29/89]), and delivery rate (36.6% [15/41] vs 47.6% [78/164]), whereas the spontaneous abortion rate was slightly higher (21.1% [4/19] vs 12.4% [11/89]). However, none of these differences were significant.
CONCLUSION: The clinical outcomes for RCT carriers were acceptable after IVF/ICSI without performing preimplantation genetic diagnosis, indicating that this approach might comprise a feasible alternative fertility treatment for RCT carriers.