Send to

Choose Destination
Hum Reprod Update. 2011 Jul-Aug;17(4):454-66. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmr003. Epub 2011 Apr 29.

Preimplantation genetic screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs.

Author information

Center for Reproductive Medicine, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.

Erratum in

  • Hum Reprod Update. 2013 Mar-Apr;19(2):206.



Preimplantation genetic screening (PGS) has increasingly been used in the past decade. Here we present a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs on the effect of PGS on the probability of live birth after IVF.


PubMed and trial registers were searched for RCTs on PGS. Trials were assessed following predetermined quality criteria. The primary outcome was live birth rate per woman, secondary outcomes were ongoing pregnancy rate, miscarriage rate, multiple pregnancy rate and pregnancy outcome.


Nine RCTs comparing IVF with and without PGS were included in our meta-analysis. Fluorescence in situ hybridization was used in all trials and cleavage stage biopsy was used in all but one trial. PGS significantly lowered live birth rate after IVF for women of advanced maternal age (risk difference: -0.08; 95% confidence interval: -0. 13 to -0.03). For a live birth rate of 26% after IVF without PGS, the rate would be between 13 and 23% using PGS. Trials where PGS was offered to women with a good prognosis and to women with repeated implantation failure suggested similar outcomes.


There is no evidence of a beneficial effect of PGS as currently applied on the live birth rate after IVF. On the contrary, for women of advanced maternal age PGS significantly lowers the live birth rate. Technical drawbacks and chromosomal mosaicism underlie this inefficacy of PGS. New approaches in the application of PGS should be evaluated carefully before their introduction into clinical practice.

[Indexed for MEDLINE]

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for Silverchair Information Systems
Loading ...
Support Center