Case Study: Role of Preimplantation Genetic Testing (PGT) in IVF Success

Abstract

For patients struggling with recurrent miscarriages, genetic disorders, or unexplained infertility, Preimplantation Genetic Testing (PGT) has now become an important tool in boosting In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) success rates. This case study looks at a couple that went through IVF along with PGT to decrease the chances of passing along a genetic condition. The report covers clinical results, the timeframe of treatment, diagnostic testing, and results, concentrating on how PGT helped achieve a successful result. The results bring to attention the essential part that genetic testing plays in confirming embryo viability and lessening the chance of both failed implantation and pregnancy loss.

Introduction

Even though IVF is a common option for those dealing with infertility, it regularly involves numerous cycles and failures that must happen before any success can be achieved. Chromosomal abnormalities in embryos contribute significantly to the failure of IVF, leading in many cases to either failed implantation or a miscarriage. Preimplantation Genetic Testing (PGT) makes it possible to evaluate embryos for hereditary abnormalities before their transfer, enabling a preference for stronger embryos.

This case study spotlights a couple with several miscarriages in their history, who tried IVF with PGT. The intention was to raise the probability of achieving a successful pregnancy through the verification that only genetically normal embryos would be implanted.

Patient Information

For three years, trying to conceive was a struggle for the 34-year-old woman alongside her 36-year-old partner. It's been two miscarriages that occurred in the first quarter of past pregnancies for the couple. Despite both partners having good health, there were no recognized chronic illnesses; however, the continuous pregnancy losses triggered additional studies.

Female patient age: 34 years

Male partner age: 36 years

Medical history: Two previous miscarriages (unexplained), no chronic conditions

Fertility treatment history: None before this IVF cycle

Genetic testing history: No previous genetic screening

Ethnicity: Caucasian

To stop additional miscarriages and bolster their chances for a healthy pregnancy, the couple looked into fertility treatment.

Clinical Findings

After analysis, basic fertility assessments including hormone levels, tracking of ovulation, and sperm analysis indicated normal results. However, given the history of miscarriages, further investigation was performed:

Karyotyping: Ruling out balanced translocations, normal in both partners.

Hysteroscopy: Disclosed a typical uterine cavity with no discoverable anatomical abnormalities.

Semen analysis: An average sperm count along with the usual motility.

Historical miscarriages raised the alarm for potential chromosomal disorders in the embryos, prompting advice for the couple to do IVF combined with PGT to test for genetic issues.

Timeline

Day 1 (Consultation): An initial assessment of fertility, a history review, and a review of treatment alternatives.

Day 10: Ovarian reserve testing and hormonal blood results came back to normal.

Day 30: The gonadotropins started the process of ovarian stimulation.

Day 45: Today, egg retrieval occurred; we got 15 eggs from the procedure.

Day 50: Producing 12 viable embryos was the result of fertilization using Intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI).

Day 55: On Day 5 embryos received a biopsy for PGT purposes.

Day 60: According to PGT results, 7 embryos were normal on a chromosomal level.

Day 65: One genetically healthy embryo was moved.

Day 80: Successful implantation successfully confirmed by the positive pregnancy test.

Diagnostic Assessment

The purpose of using Preimplantation Genetic Testing (PGT) was to evaluate embryos for aneuploidies (chromosomal abnormalities). The process involved:

Embryo Biopsy: There was a small sampling of cells extracted from the embryos on Day 5 (blastocyst stage).

Genetic Testing: To screen for chromosomal abnormalities, the cells were examined with next-generation sequencing (NGS).

Result: Seven of the 12 embryos were discovered to be genetically sound, but 5 showed chromosomal anomalies.

Follow-up and Outcomes

Following the embryo transfer, the patient was closely monitored through blood tests and ultrasounds:

Day 80 (2 weeks post-transfer): The result of the hCG test confirmed that pregnancy had occurred.

Week 8 of pregnancy: Ultrasound first verified both a robust heartbeat and positive progress in development.

Week 12: The patient underwent mild morning sickness but did not have any complications.

Week 20: The anatomy scan identified normal growth in the fetus, as well as the nonexistence of genetic deviations.

Week 40: The patient had a normal delivery of a healthy baby at the end of the term.

The case findings showed the approach through which PGT helps in reducing miscarriage probability and increasing success chances during pregnancy by choosing only genetically strong embryos.

Discussion

This case points out the critical importance of PGT for partners experiencing repeated miscarriages. The principal motivation behind PGT is to lower the likelihood of implanting embryos with chromosomal irregularities, which are a leading cause of both miscarriage and failure in IVF.

The likelihood is that the couple's earlier miscarriages were because of genetic inconsistencies in the embryos, despite the normal karyotypes seen in both partners. In the absence of PGT, it was likely that additional IVF cycles would have produced like outcomes. Selecting only normally genetically embodied embryos raised the likelihood of successful implantation and ensuring a healthy pregnancy.

The ability to perform comprehensive chromosome screening (CCS) with PGT has revolutionized IVF by allowing clinicians to:

• Pick embryos with the greatest odds of realizing a successful pregnancy.

• Decrease the risk tied to miscarriage as well as unsuccessful IVF cycles.

• Increase the faith of patients, notably those with infertility or miscarriage in their histories.

Still, PGT has some constraints. Its addition to IVF expenses is a reality, but while it is highly precise, it doesn't ensure success in all scenarios. In addition to other elements, uterine health and the quality of the embryo continue to influence the final result.

Takeaway

The application of Preimplantation Genetic Testing (PGT) is capable of markedly raising the chances of a successful IVF cycle, especially for patients with miscarriage histories or known genetic dangers. Through its technology, the identification of genetically normal embryos occurs, which lessens the chance of implantation failure or pregnancy loss. In this situation, PGT was important in guaranteeing the health of the pregnancy and a successful live birth, following a history of recurrent miscarriages.

Patient’s Perspective

Being involved in technology and talent for their care, the couple experienced a combination of comfort and appreciation. The feeling the multiple miscarriages had on their emotions prompted them to find a ray of hope with a greater chance of successful pregnancies because of PGT. Their concerns concerning genetic problems in their embryo eased, and the positive result validated their selection to pursue IVF with PGT.

Conclusion

In today's IVF therapies, preimplantation genetic testing, or PGT, is an invaluable tool, especially for patients who have a history of recurrent miscarriages or who are known to have certain genetic risks. After two earlier miscarriages, PGT was essential in this case in identifying genetically normal embryos, resulting in a successful pregnancy and the birth of a healthy child. PGT lowers the risk of miscarriage and increases the chance of successful implantation by enabling doctors to choose healthy embryos. Although PGT does not ensure success, couples dealing with infertility can greatly benefit from its capacity to check for chromosomal abnormalities. This instance highlights the value of genetic testing in reproductive medicine by providing patients with the means to reduce risks and improve their chances of conceiving a healthy child.

References

1. Alfarawati, S., Fragouli, E., Colls, P., Stevens, J., Gutiérrez-Mateo, C., Schoolcraft, W. B., Katz-Jaffe, M., & Wells, D. (2011). The relationship between blastocyst morphology, chromosomal abnormality, and embryo gender. Fertility and Sterility, 95(2), 520–524. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.08.035

2. Scott, R. T., Upham, K. M., Forman, E. J., Zhao, T., & Treff, N. R. (2013). Cleavage-stage biopsy significantly impairs human embryonic implantation potential while blastocyst biopsy does not: a randomized and paired clinical trial. Fertility and Sterility, 100(3), 624–630. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.04.039

3. Munné, S., Chen, S., Colls, P., Garrisi, J., Zheng, X., Cekleniak, N., Lenzi, M., Hughes, P., Fischer, J., & Garrisi, M. (2007). Maternal age, morphology, development, and chromosome abnormalities in over 6000 cleavage-stage embryos. Reproductive BioMedicine Online, 14(5), 628–634. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1472-6483(10)61057-2

4. Capalbo, A., Ubaldi, F. M., Rienzi, L., & Cimadomo, D. (2016). Preimplantation Genetic Testing for Aneuploidy (PGT-A) in ART: Theoretical Illusions and Clinical Concerns. Human Reproduction Update, 22(6), 735–746. https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmw041

5. Wells, D., Kaur, K., Grifo, J., Taylor, D., Malter, H., & Munne, S. (2020). Clinical outcomes following comprehensive chromosome screening of blastocysts: The clinical implications of chromosomal mosaicism. Reproductive BioMedicine Online, 40(3), 323–329. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2020.11.011

6. Handyside, A. H., Kontogianni, E. H., Hardy, K., & Winston, R. M. L. (1990). Pregnancies from biopsied human preimplantation embryos sexed by Y-specific DNA amplification. Nature, 344(6268), 768–770. https://doi.org/10.1038/344768a0