Double versus single blastocyst biopsy and vitrification in preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) cycles: protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis of clinical and neonatal outcomes

被引:0
作者
Alessandra A. Vireque [1 ]
Vasileios Stolakis [1 ]
Thalita S. Berteli [1 ]
Maria C. Bertero [1 ]
Jason Kofinas [1 ]
机构
[1] Kofinas Fertility Group 65, Broadway, New York, 10006, NY
关键词
Biopsy/adverse effects; Birthweight; Genetic testing/methods; Live birth rate; Neonatal outcomes; PGT; Re-biopsy; Rewarming/adverse effects; Systematic review; Trophectoderm biopsy;
D O I
10.1186/s13643-025-02846-8
中图分类号
学科分类号
摘要
Background: The number of re-biopsied blastocysts is widely increasing in IVF cycles and concerns regarding retesting, which involves double biopsy and vitrification-warming, have been raised. The re-biopsy intervention seems to significantly reduce the pregnancy potential of a blastocyst but the evidence is still restricted to retrospective observational studies reporting a low number of cycles with re-biopsied embryos. Additionally, the neonatal outcomes after the transfer of re-biopsied and re-vitrified embryos are poorly documented to date. Methods: A systematic review will be conducted, using PubMed/Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar to identify all relevant randomized control trials (RCTs), cohort and case–control studies published until December 2024. The participants will include women undergoing preimplantation genetic testing and single euploid frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles. The primary outcomes are live birth rate (LBR) and singleton birthweight, whereas secondary outcomes are post-warming embryo survival rate, clinical pregnancy (fetal heart pregnancies at 4.5 weeks), miscarriage rate (loss of pregnancy before the 20th week, and stillbirth), preterm birth (PB) rate, small-for-gestational age (SGA, < − 1.28 SDS (standard deviation score)), large-for-gestational age (LGA, > + 1.28 SDS), low birthweight (LBW; birthweight < 2500 g), preterm birth (gestation < 37 weeks), macrosomia (birthweight > 4000 g), pre-eclampsia, eclampsia, perinatal death, and major congenital malformations. Eligible studies will be selected according to pre-specified inclusion and exclusion criteria. Additionally, manual search will target other unpublished reports and supplementary data. At least two independent reviewers will be responsible for article screening, data extraction and bias assessment of eligible studies. A third reviewer will resolve any disagreements. The Newcastle–Ottawa scale (NOS) will be used to assess the quality of the included studies. Studies that receive a score of 7 or higher on the NOS will be considered to have high methodological quality. The extracted data will be pooled and a meta-analysis will be performed. To carry out the data synthesis, a random effects meta-analysis will be conducted using the RevMan software. Heterogeneity will be evaluated by Cochran’s Q test and the I2 statistics and the strength of evidence will be rated with reference to GRADE. The review and meta-analysis will be reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Discussion: The findings of this systematic review will be important to clinicians, embryologists, patients, and assisted reproductive service providers regarding the decision-making on retesting embryos for PGT in FET cycles. Systematic review registration: PROSPERO CRD42024498955. © The Author(s) 2025.
引用
收藏
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [21] Clinical outcomes of immunoglobulin use in solid organ transplant recipients: Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Cowan J.
    Hutton B.
    Fergusson N.
    Bennett A.
    Tay J.
    Cameron D.W.
    Knoll G.A.
    Systematic Reviews, 4 (1)
  • [22] Prediction of clinical outcomes in individuals with chronic low back pain: a protocol for a systematic review with meta-analysis
    Mendonca, Liliane
    Monteiro-Soares, Matilde
    Azevedo, Luis Filipe
    SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2018, 7
  • [23] Prediction of clinical outcomes in individuals with chronic low back pain: a protocol for a systematic review with meta-analysis
    Liliane Mendonça
    Matilde Monteiro-Soares
    Luís Filipe Azevedo
    Systematic Reviews, 7
  • [24] Double versus single homologous intrauterine insemination for male factor infertility: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Zavos, Apostolos
    Daponte, Alexandros
    Garas, Antonios
    Verykouki, Christina
    Papanikolaou, Evangelos
    Anifandis, Georgios
    Polyzos, Nikolaos P.
    ASIAN JOURNAL OF ANDROLOGY, 2013, 15 (04) : 533 - 538
  • [25] Efficacy of opioid combination versus single opioid for adult cancer pain: a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis
    Maeng, Chi Hoon
    Hui, David
    Kang, Ji-Yeon
    Kim, Soo Young
    Kwon, Jung Hye
    BMJ OPEN, 2024, 14 (12):
  • [26] Risk thresholds for the frequency of cannabis use during pregnancy and adverse neonatal outcomes: protocol for a systematic review and dose-response meta-analysis
    Robinson, Tessa
    Fischer, Benedikt
    Hautala, Rebecca
    Bertram, Mavoy
    Ali, Muhammad Usman
    Farrokhyar, Forough
    Jack, Susan
    Kapiriri, Lydia
    SYSTEMATIC REVIEWS, 2024, 13 (01)
  • [27] Impact of cytomegalovirus reactivation on clinical outcomes in immunocompetent critically ill patients: Protocol for a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Lachance P.
    Chen J.
    Featherstone R.
    Sligl W.
    Systematic Reviews, 5 (1)
  • [28] Maternal and neonatal outcomes of singleton versus twin pregnancies complicated by gestational diabetes mellitus: A systematic review and meta-analysis
    Tu, Fengming
    Fei, Aimei
    PLOS ONE, 2023, 18 (01):
  • [29] Comparisons of benefits and risks of single embryo transfer versus double embryo transfer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Shujuan Ma
    Yangqin Peng
    Liang Hu
    Xiaojuan Wang
    Yiquan Xiong
    Yi Tang
    Jing Tan
    Fei Gong
    Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology, 20
  • [30] Comparisons of benefits and risks of single embryo transfer versus double embryo transfer: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Ma, Shujuan
    Peng, Yangqin
    Hu, Liang
    Wang, Xiaojuan
    Xiong, Yiquan
    Tang, Yi
    Tan, Jing
    Gong, Fei
    REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY AND ENDOCRINOLOGY, 2022, 20 (01)