Search

BACKGROUND: Assisted reproductive technology (ART) has allowed couples with a family history of a monogenic genetic disease, or a disease-carrying gene, to reduce the chance of them having a child with the genetic disorder. This is achieved by genetically testing the embryos using an advanced process called preimplantation genetic testing for monogenic or single gene disorders (PGT-M), such as Huntington's disease or cystic fibrosis. This current terminology (PGT-M) has replaced the formerly-known preimplantation genetic diagnosis (PGD). During PGT-M, one or more embryo cells are biopsied and analysed for genetic or chromosomal anomalies before transferring the embryos to the endometrial cavity. Biopsy for PGT-M can be performed at day 3 of cleavage-stage embryo development when the embryo is at the six- to the eight-cell stage, with either one or two blastomeres being removed for analysis. Biopsy for PGT-M can also be performed on day 5 of the blastocyst stage of embryo development when the embryo has 80 to 100 cells, with five to six cells being removed for analysis. Day 5 biopsy has taken over from day 3 biopsy as the most widely-used biopsy technique; however, there is a lack of summarised evidence from randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that assesses the effectiveness and safety of day 5 biopsy compared to day 3 biopsy. Since biopsy is an invasive process, whether it is carried out at day 3 or day 5 of embryo development may have different impacts on further development, implantation, pregnancy, live birth and perinatal outcomes.OBJECTIVES: To assess the benefits and harms of day 5 embryo biopsy, in comparison to day 3 biopsy, in PGT-M in women undergoing in vitro fertilisation (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles.SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following electronic bibliographic databases in December 2021 to identify relevant RCTs: the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group (CGFG) Specialised Trials Register; CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and PsycINFO. We also handsearched grey literature, such as trial registers, relevant journals, reference lists, Google Scholar, and published conference abstracts.SELECTION CRITERIA: Eligible RCTs compared day 5 versus day 3 embryo biopsy for PGT-M. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane. The primary review outcomes were live births and miscarriages. We calculated outcomes per woman/couple randomised and reported odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).MAIN RESULTS: We included one RCT involving 20 women. The evidence was of very low certainty; the main limitations of the study were serious risk of bias due to lack of blinding of study personnel, and imprecision. We are uncertain whether day 5 embryo biopsy compared to day 3 biopsy has an effect on live births (OR 1.50, 95% CI 0.26 to 8.82; 1 RCT, 20 women; very low-certainty evidence). The evidence suggests that if the chance of live birth following day 3 biopsy was assumed to be 40%, then the chance with day 5 biopsy is between 15% and 85%. It is also uncertain whether day 5 embryo biopsy compared to day 3 biopsy has an effect on miscarriages (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.05 to 18.57; 1 RCT, 20 women; very low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether day 5 embryo biopsy compared to day 3 biopsy has an effect on other secondary outcome measures, including viable intrauterine pregnancies (OR 2.25, 95% CI 0.38 to 13.47; 1 RCT, 20 women; very low-certainty evidence), ectopic pregnancies (OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.01 to 3.85; 1 RCT, 20 women; very low-certainty evidence), stillbirths (OR not estimable as no events in either group; 1 RCT, 20 women; very low-certainty evidence) or termination of pregnancies (OR 3.32, 95% CI 0.12 to 91.60; 1 RCT, 20 women; very low-certainty evidence). No studies reported on gestational age at birth, birthweight, neonatal mortality and major congenital anomaly.AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We are uncertain if there is a difference in live births and miscarriages, viable intrauterine pregnancies, ectopic pregnancies, stillbirths or termination of pregnancies between day 5 and day 3 embryo biopsy for PGT-M. There was insufficient evidence to draw any conclusions regarding other adverse outcomes. The results should be interpreted with caution, as the evidence was of very low certainty due to limited studies, high risk of bias in the included study, and an overall low level of precision.

INTRODUCTION: A uterine niche is a defect at the site of the uterine caesarean scar that is associated with gynaecological symptoms and infertility. Promising results are reported in cohort studies after a laparoscopic niche resection concerning reduction of gynaecological symptoms in relation to baseline and concerning pregnancy outcomes. However, randomised controlled trials to study the effect of a laparoscopic niche resection on reproductive outcomes in infertile women are lacking. This study will answer the question if laparoscopic niche resection in comparison to expectant management improves reproductive outcomes in infertile women with a large uterine niche.METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The LAPRES study is a randomised, non-blinded, controlled trial, including 200 infertile women with a total follow-up of 2 years. Women with the presence of a large niche in the uterine caesarean scar and unexplained infertility of at least 1 year or failed IVF will be randomly allocated to a laparoscopic niche resection within 6 weeks or to expectant management for at least 9 months. A large niche is defined as a niche with a depth of >50% of the myometrial thickness and a residual myometrium of ≤3 mm on transvaginal ultrasound. Those receiving expectant management will be allowed to receive fertility therapies, including assisted reproductive techniques, if indicated. The primary outcome is time to ongoing pregnancy, defined as a viable intrauterine pregnancy at 12 weeks' gestation. Secondary outcome measures are time to conception leading to a live birth, other pregnancy outcomes, received fertility therapies after randomisation, menstruation characteristics, patient satisfaction, quality of life, additional interventions, and surgical and ultrasound outcomes (intervention group). Questionnaires will be filled out at baseline, 6, 12 and 24 months after randomisation. Ultrasound evaluation will be performed at baseline and at 3 months after surgery.ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study protocol was approved by the medical ethics committee of the Amsterdam University Medical Centre. (Ref. No. 2017.030). Participants will sign a written informed consent before participation. The results of this study will be submitted to a peer-reviewed journal for publication. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER DUTCH TRIAL REGISTER REF NO NL6350 : http://www.trialregister.nl.