Center of Reproductive Medicine, Guangzhou Women and Children's Medical Center, Guangzhou Medical University, Guangzhou, Guangdong, CN, China.
Peking Jabrehoo Med Tech Co., Ltd, Beijing, CN, China.
BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2024 Feb 1;24(1):100. doi: 10.1186/s12884-024-06284-7.
To determine whether non-invasive prenatal testing is an alternative testing option to preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) in pregnant patients.
This was a retrospective study of the clinical outcomes of patients who underwent PGT and invasive or non-invasive pregnancy testing after euploid blastocyst transfer at our IVF centre between January 2017 and December 2022.
In total, 321 patients were enrolled in this study, 138 (43.0%) received invasive pregnancy testing, and 183 (57.0%) patients underwent non-invasive testing. The mean age of the patients in Group 2 was higher than that of the patients in Group 1 (35.64 ± 4.74 vs. 31.04 ± 4.15 years, P < 0.001). The basal LH and AMH levels were higher in Group 1 than in Group 2 (4.30 ± 2.68 vs. 3.40 ± 1.88, P = 0.003; 5.55 ± 11.22 vs. 4.09 ± 3.55, P = 0.012), but the clinical outcomes were not significantly different. Furthermore, the clinical outcomes of patients undergoing invasive testing were similar to those of patients undergoing non-invasive testing with the same PGT indication.
Our results suggest that non-invasive pregnancy testing is a suitable alternative option for detecting the foetal chromosomal status in a PGT cycle. However, the usefulness of non-invasive testing in PGT-M patients is still limited.
确定非侵入性产前检测是否是接受胚胎植入前遗传学检测(PGT)的孕妇的替代检测选择。
这是一项回顾性研究,对 2017 年 1 月至 2022 年 12 月期间在我们的体外受精中心进行 PGT 及侵袭性或非侵袭性妊娠检测的患者的临床结局进行了研究。
共有 321 名患者纳入本研究,其中 138 名(43.0%)接受侵袭性妊娠检测,183 名(57.0%)患者接受非侵袭性检测。组 2 患者的平均年龄高于组 1(35.64 ± 4.74 岁 vs. 31.04 ± 4.15 岁,P < 0.001)。组 1 的基础 LH 和 AMH 水平高于组 2(4.30 ± 2.68 比 3.40 ± 1.88,P = 0.003;5.55 ± 11.22 比 4.09 ± 3.55,P = 0.012),但临床结局无显著差异。此外,侵袭性检测患者的临床结局与具有相同 PGT 指征的非侵袭性检测患者相似。
我们的研究结果表明,非侵袭性妊娠检测是检测 PGT 周期中胎儿染色体状态的合适替代选择。然而,非侵袭性检测在 PGT-M 患者中的应用仍有限。