Ben Rafael Zion
Adelson School of Medicine, Ariel, University, Israel.
Hum Reprod Open. 2021 Apr 14;2021(2):hoab010. doi: 10.1093/hropen/hoab010. eCollection 2021.
This article addresses the limitations of the endometrial receptivity array (ERA) methodology to increase implantation. Such limitations vary from the assumed inconsistency of the endometrial biopsy, the variable number of genes found to be dysregulated in endometrium samples without the embryonal-induced effect, the failure to account for the simultaneous serum progesterone level, and the expected low percentage of patients who may need this add-on procedure, to the difficulties in synchronising the endometrium with hormone replacements in successive cycles and the inherent perinatal risks associated with routine cryopreservation of embryos. Without a gold standard to compare, the claim that the window of implantation (WOI) might be off by ±12 h only requires a good argument for the advantage it provides to human procreation, knowing that embryos can linger for days before actual embedding starts and that the window is actually a few days. The intra-patient variations in the test need to be addressed. In summary, like all other add-ons, it is doubtful whether the ERA test use can significantly enhance implantation success rates.
本文探讨了子宫内膜容受性阵列(ERA)方法在提高着床率方面的局限性。这些局限性包括:子宫内膜活检结果的假定不一致性;在无胚胎诱导作用的子宫内膜样本中发现的基因失调数量可变;未考虑血清孕酮水平;可能需要这种附加程序的患者预期比例较低;在连续周期中使子宫内膜与激素替代同步存在困难;以及与胚胎常规冷冻保存相关的固有围产期风险。在没有金标准进行比较的情况下,关于着床窗(WOI)可能相差±12小时的说法,仅需有充分理由说明其对人类生殖的益处,因为已知胚胎在实际着床开始前可停留数天,而且着床窗实际上是几天时间。还需要解决患者体内测试结果的差异问题。总之,与所有其他附加程序一样,ERA测试的使用是否能显著提高着床成功率令人怀疑。