• Elias M Dahdouh, Jacques Balayla, François Audibert, Genetics Committee, R Douglas Wilson, Jo-Ann Brock, Carla Campagnolo, June Carroll, Karen Chong, Alain Gagnon, Jo-Ann Johnson, William MacDonald, Nanette Okun, Melanie Pastuck, and Karine Vallée-Pouliot.
• Montreal QC.
• J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2015 May 1; 37 (5): 451-63.

ObjectiveTo update and review the techniques and indications of preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD) and preimplantation genetic screening (PGS).OptionsDiscussion about the genetic and technical aspects of preimplantation reproductive techniques, particularly those using new cytogenetic technologies and embryo-stage biopsy.OutcomesClinical outcomes of reproductive techniques following the use of PGD and PGS are included. This update does not discuss in detail the adverse outcomes that have been recorded in association with assisted reproductive technologies.EvidencePublished literature was retrieved through searches of The Cochrane Library and Medline in April 2014 using appropriate controlled vocabulary (aneuploidy, blastocyst/physiology, genetic diseases, preimplantation diagnosis/methods, fertilization in vitro) and key words (e.g., preimplantation genetic diagnosis, preimplantation genetic screening, comprehensive chromosome screening, aCGH, SNP microarray, qPCR, and embryo selection). Results were restricted to systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials/controlled clinical trials, and observational studies published from 1990 to April 2014. There were no language restrictions. Searches were updated on a regular basis and incorporated in the update to January 2015. Additional publications were identified from the bibliographies of retrieved articles. Grey (unpublished) literature was identified through searching the websites of health technology assessment and health technology-related agencies, clinical practice guideline collections, clinical trial registries, and national and international medical specialty societies.ValuesThe quality of evidence in this document was rated using the criteria described in the Report of the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care. (Table 1) BENEFITS, HARMS, AND COSTS: This update will educate readers about new preimplantation genetic concepts, directions, and technologies. The major harms and costs identified are those of assisted reproductive technologies.SummaryPreimplantation genetic diagnosis is an alternative to prenatal diagnosis for the detection of genetic disorders in couples at risk of transmitting a genetic condition to their offspring. Preimplantation genetic screening is being proposed to improve the effectiveness of in vitro fertilization by screening for embryonic aneuploidy. Though FISH-based PGS showed adverse effects on IVF success, emerging evidence from new studies using comprehensive chromosome screening technology appears promising. Recommendations 1. Before preimplantation genetic diagnosis is performed, genetic counselling must be provided by a certified genetic counsellor to ensure that patients fully understand the risk of having an affected child, the impact of the disease on an affected child, and the benefits and limitations of all available options for preimplantation and prenatal diagnosis. (III-A) 2. Couples should be informed that preimplantation genetic diagnosis can reduce the risk of conceiving a child with a genetic abnormality carried by one or both parents if that abnormality can be identified with tests performed on a single cell or on multiple trophectoderm cells. (II-2B) 3. Invasive prenatal or postnatal testing to confirm the results of preimplantation genetic diagnosis is encouraged because the methods used for preimplantation genetic diagnosis have technical limitations that include the possibility of a false result. (II-2B) 4. Trophectoderm biopsy has no measurable impact on embryo development, as opposed to blastomere biopsy. Therefore, whenever possible, trophectoderm biopsy should be the method of choice in embryo biopsy and should be performed by experienced hands. (I-B) 5. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis of single-gene disorders should ideally be performed with multiplex polymerase chain reaction coupled with trophectoderm biopsy whenever available. (II-2B) 6. The use of comprehensive chromosome screening technology coupled with trophectoderm biopsy in preimplantation genetic diagnosis in couples carrying chromosomal translocations is recommended because it is associated with favourable clinical outcomes. (II-2B) 7. Before preimplantation genetic screening is performed, thorough education and counselling must be provided by a certified genetic counsellor to ensure that patients fully understand the limitations of the technique, the risk of error, and the ongoing debate on whether preimplantation genetic screening is necessary to improve live birth rates with in vitro fertilization. (III-A) 8. Preimplantation genetic screening using fluorescence in situ hybridization technology on day-3 embryo biopsy is associated with decreased live birth rates and therefore should not be performed with in vitro fertilization. (I-E) 9. Preimplantation genetic screening using comprehensive chromosome screening technology on blastocyst biopsy, increases implantation rates and improves embryo selection in IVF cycles in patients with a good prognosis. (I-B).

26 keywords...

hide…