Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Assistierte Reproduktion: Möglichkeiten und Grenzen

Assisted reproduction: possibilities and limits

  • Leitthema
  • Published:
Der Gynäkologe Aims and scope

Zusammenfassung

Die Reproduktionsmedizin hat in den letzten Jahrzehnten gewaltige Fortschritte erzielt. Es können Schwangerschaftsraten erreicht werden, die denen bei Spontankonzeption vergleichbar sind. Methoden zur Patientensicherheit wie neue Stimulationsprotokolle und der elektive SET („single embryo transfer“) zur Verringerung der Mehrlingsrate stehen im Vordergrund. In Deutschland ist der elektive SET in vollem Umfang aber nicht möglich, was im Vergleich zum Ausland zu einer höheren Belastung durch eine höhere Rate an Mehrlingsschwangerschaften führt. Die Blastozystenkultur ist dagegen mittlerweile implementiert. Die Präimplantationsdiagnostik ist in Deutschland auch nur in einem begrenzten Rahmen erlaubt, das Aneuploidiescreening ist derzeit verboten.

Abstract

Reproductive medicine has made significant progress in recent years. Pregnancy rates are similar to those for spontaneous conception. New stimulation protocols improve patient safety and elective single embryo transfer (SET) lowers the risk of multiple birth. Elective SET is currently not feasible in Germany due to legal restrictions, thus leading to a higher rate of multiple pregnancies compared to other countries. In contrast, blastocyst culture is now implemented in Germany. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis is permitted within strictly defined limits, whereas aneuploidy screening is forbidden.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Abb. 1

Literatur

  1. Al-Inany HG, Youssef MA, Ayeleke RO, Brown J, Lam WS, Broekmans FJ (2016) Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonists for assisted reproductive technology. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016(4):CD1750

    Google Scholar 

  2. Anderson D (2017) Preliminary ICMART results. Focus Reproduction 3:19

    Google Scholar 

  3. Armstrong S, Arroll N, Cree LM et al (2015) Time-lapse systems for embryo incubation and assessment in assisted reproduction. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015:CD11320

    Google Scholar 

  4. De Rycke M, Belva F, Goossens V, Moutou C, SenGupta SB, Traeger-Synodinos J, Coonen E (2011) ESHRE PGD Consortium data collection XIII: cycles from January to December 2010 with pregnancy follow-up to October 2011. Hum Reprod 30:1763–1789

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Deutsches IVF Register (2017) Jahrbuch 2016. J Reproduktionsmed Endokrinol 14:275–305

    Google Scholar 

  6. Dunson D, Baird D, Colombo B (2004) Increased infertility with age in men and women. Obstet Gynecol 103:7–14

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. European IVF-monitoring Consortium (EIM); European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE), Calhaz-Jorge C, De Geyter C, Kupka MS, de Mouzon J, Erb K, Mocanu E, Glujovsky D, Farquhar C, Quinteiro Retamar AM, Alvarez Sedo CR, Blake D (2016) Cleavage stage versus blastocyst stage embryo transfer in assisted reproductive technology. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016(6):CD2118

    Google Scholar 

  8. Glujovsky D, Farquhar C, Quinteiro Retamar AM, Alvarez Sedo CR, Blake D (2016) Cleavage stage versus blastocyst stage embryo transfer in assisted reproductive technology. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2016(306):CD2118

    Google Scholar 

  9. Handyside AH, Pattinson JK, Penketh RJ, Delhanty JD, Winston RM, Tuddenham EG (1989) Biopsy of human preimplantation embryos and sexing by DNA amplification. Lancet 1(8634):347–349

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Kolibianakis EM, Collins J, Tarlatzis BC, Devroey P, Diedrich K, Griesinger G (2006) Among patients treated for IVF with gonadotrophins and GnRH analogues, is the probability of live birth dependent on the type of analogue used? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update 12:651–671

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Lambalk CB, Banga FR, Huirne JA, Toftager M, Pinborg A, Homburg R, van der Veen F, van Wely M (2017) GnRH antagonist versus long agonist protocols in IVF: a systematic review and meta-analysis accounting for patient type. Hum Reprod Update 23:560–579

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Mastenbroek S, Twisk M, van Echten-Arends J, Sikkema-Raddatz B, Korevaar JC, Verhoeve HR, Vogel NE, Arts EG, de Vries JW, Bossuyt PM, Buys CH, Heineman MJ, Repping S, van der Veen F (2007) In vitro fertilization with preimplantation genetic screening. N Engl J Med 357:9–17

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Mastenbroek S, Twisk M, van der Veen F, Repping S (2011) Preimplantation genetic screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs. Hum Reprod Update 17:454–466

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Nagaoka SI, Hassold TJ, Hunt PA (2012) Human aneuploidy: mechanisms and new insights into an age-old problem. Nat Rev Genet 13:493–504

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Nationale Akademie der Wissenschaften Leopoldina (2017) Ein Fortpflanzungsmedizingesetz für Deutschland, Diskussion Nr. 13, Halle (Saale)

  16. Practice Committees of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine and the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology (2018) The use of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A): a committee opinion. Fertil Steril 109:429–436

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Pribenszky C, Nilselid A‑M, Montag M (2017) Time-lapse culture with morphokinetic embryo selection improves pregnancy and live birth chances and reduces early pregnancy loss: a metaanalysis. Reprod Biomed Online 35:511–520

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Rienzi L, Gracia C, Maggiulli R, LaBarbera AR, Kaser DJ, Ubaldi FM, Vanderpoel S, Racowsky C (2017) Oocyte, embryo and blastocyst cryopreservation in ART: systematic review and meta-analysis comparing slow-freezing versus vitrification to produce evidence for the development of global guidance. Hum Reprod Update 23:139–155

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Steptoe PC, Edwards RG (1978) Birth after the reimplantation of a human embryo. Lancet 2(8085):366

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. von Wolff M, Thaler CJ, Frambach T, Zeeb C, Lawrenz B, Popovici RM, Strowitzki T (2009) Ovarian stimulation to cryopreserve fertilized oocytes in cancer patients can be started in the luteal phase. Fertil Steril 92:1360–1365

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Youssef MA, Van der Veen F, Al-Inany HG, Mochtar MH, Griesinger G, Nagi Mohesen M, Aboulfoutouh I, van Wely M (2014) Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist versus HCG for oocyte triggering in antagonist-assisted reproductive technology. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014(10):CD8046

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Klein Sarau 45, 23627, Groß Sarau, Deutschland

    K. Diedrich

  2. Gynäkologische Endokrinologie und Fertilitätsstörungen, Universitäts-Frauenklinik Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Deutschland

    T. Strowitzki

  3. Fertility Center Berlin, Berlin, Deutschland

    H. Kentenich

Authors
  1. K. Diedrich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. T. Strowitzki
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. H. Kentenich
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to K. Diedrich.

Ethics declarations

Interessenkonflikt

K. Diedrich, T. Strowitzki und H. Kentenich geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht.

Dieser Beitrag beinhaltet keine von den Autoren durchgeführten Studien an Menschen oder Tieren.

Additional information

Redaktion

K. Diedrich, Hamburg

H. Kentenich, Berlin

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Diedrich, K., Strowitzki, T. & Kentenich, H. Assistierte Reproduktion: Möglichkeiten und Grenzen. Gynäkologe 51, 607–612 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00129-018-4290-9

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00129-018-4290-9

Schlüsselwörter

Keywords

Search

Navigation