Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics

, Volume 27, Issue 12, pp 729–733 | Cite as

The utility of embryo banking in order to increase the number of embryos available for preimplantation genetic screening in advanced maternal age patients

  • John J. Orris
  • Tyl H. Taylor
  • Janice W. Gilchrist
  • Susan V. Hallowell
  • Michael J. Glassner
  • J. David Wininger



To determine if embryo banking with PGS is more optimal than proceeding with PGS regardless of embryo number.


Patients were divided into 2 groups, group 1 were those that banked embryos and proceeded through another round of IVF prior to PGS, and group 2 underwent PGS regardless of embryo number. Group 2 was divided into group 2A (patients with >10 embryos) and group 2B (patients who had <10 embryos).


There was no difference in embryos biopsied, normal embryos, number transferred, and pregnancy rate between group 1 and 2. A significant number of patients did not have a transfer in group 2B (6/11) compared to group 1 (3/19) (P = 0.0419). There was no significance between pregnancy rates per transfer between group 1 (6/16) and group 2B (2/5).


Our data suggests that banking will increase the odds of going to transfer but there was no increase in pregnancy rates.


Aneuploidy Embryo banking IVF PGS Preimplantation genetic screening 


  1. 1.
    Verlinsky Y, Cieslak J, Freidine M, Ivakhnenko V, Wolf G, Kovalinskaya L, et al. Pregnancies following pre-conception diagnosis of common aneuploidies by fluorescence in situ hybridization. Hum Reprod. 1995;10:1923–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Magli MC, Gianaroli L, Munne S, Ferraretti AP. Incidence of chromosomal abnormalities from a morphologically normal cohort of embryos in poor prognosis patients. J Assist Reprod Genet. 1998;15:297–301.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Munne S, Sandalinas M, Escudero T, Marquez C, Cohen J. Chromosome mosaicism in cleavage-stage human embryos: evidence of a maternal age effect. Reprod Biomed Online. 2002;4:19–28.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Munne S, Chen S, Colls P, Garrisi J, Zheng X, Cekleniak N, et al. Maternal age, morphology, development and chromosome abnormalities in over 6000 cleavage-stage embryos. Reprod Biomed Online. 2007;14:628–34.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Mastenbroek S, Twisk M, Van Echten-Arends J, Sikkema-Raddatz B, Korevaar JC, Verhoeve HR, et al. In vitro fertilization with preimplantation genetic screening. New Engl J Med. 2007;357:9–17.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Staessen C, Platteau P, Van Assche E, Michiels A, Tournaye H, Camus M, et al. Comparison of blastocyst transfer with or without preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidy screening in couples with advanced maternal age: a prospective randomized control trial. Hum Reprod. 2004;19:2849–58.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Practice Committee of Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology, Practice Committee of American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Preimplantation genetic testing: a practice committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2008;90:S136–43.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Gianaroli L, Magli C, Ferraretti AP, Munne S. Preimplantation diagnosis for aneuploidies in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization with a poor prognosis: identification of the categories for which it should be proposed. Fertil Steril. 1999;72:837–44.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Gianaroli L, Magli MC, Ferraretti AP, Tabanelli C, Trombetta C, Boudjema E. The role of preimplantation diagnosis for aneuploidies. Reprod Biomed Online. 2002;4:31–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Munne S, Escurdero T, Colls P, Xuezhong Z, Oter M, Garrisi M, et al. Predictability of preimplantation genetic diagnosis of aneuploidy and translocations on prospective attempts. Reprod Biomed Online. 2004;9:645–51.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Platteau P, Staessen C, Michiels A, Steirteghem AV, Liebaers I, Devroey P. Preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidy screening in women older than 37 years. Fertil Steril. 2005;84:319–24.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Taylor TH, Wright G, Jones-Colon S, Mitchell-Leef D, Kort HI, Nagy ZP. Comparison of ICSI and conventional IVF in patients with increased oocyte immaturity. Reprod Biomed Online. 2008;17:46–52.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Leibo SP. A one-step method for direct nonsurgical transfer of frozen-thawed bovine embryos. Theriogenology. 1984;21:767–90.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Edirisinghe R, Jemmott R, Allan J. Comparison of growth rates of fresh and frozen-thawed embryos according to chromosomal status. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2005;22:295–300.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Karlstrom PO, Bergh T, Forsberg AS, Sandkvist U, Wikland M. Prognostic factors for the success rate of embryo freezing. Hum Reprod. 1997;12:1263–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Iwarsson E, Lundqvist M, Inzuna J, Ahrlund-Richter L, Sjoblom P, Lundkvist O, et al. A high degree of aneuploidy in frozen-thawed human preimplantation embryos. Hum Genet. 1999;104:376–82.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Taylor TH, Hallowell SV, Phillips M, Orris JJ, Glassner MJ, Wininger JD. Comparison of 9 probe and 12 probe fluorescence in-situ hybridization. Fertil Steril. 2008;90:S490.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Munne S, Sandalinas M, Escudero T, Velilla E, Walmsley R, Sadowy S, et al. Improved implantation after preimplantation genetic diagnosis of aneuploidy. Reprod Biomed Online. 2003;7:91–7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ferraretti AP, Magli MC, Kopcow L, Gianaroli L. Prognostic role of preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidy in assisted reproductive technology outcome. Hum Reprod. 2004;19:694–9.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • John J. Orris
    • 1
  • Tyl H. Taylor
    • 1
  • Janice W. Gilchrist
    • 1
  • Susan V. Hallowell
    • 1
  • Michael J. Glassner
    • 1
  • J. David Wininger
    • 1
  1. 1.Main Line Fertility and Reproductive MedicineIVF LabBryn MawrUSA

Personalised recommendations