[1]Capalbo A., Hoffmann E.R., Cimadomo D., Maria Ubaldi F., Rienzi L. Human female meiosis revised: new insights into the mechanisms of chromosome segregation and aneuploidies from advanced genomics and time-lapse imaging. Hum Reprod Update. 20171-17. 10.1093/humupd/dmx026
[2]Capalbo A., Rienzi L. Mosaicism between trophectoderm and inner cell mass. Fertil Steril. 2017;107:1098-1106. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.03.0235
[3]Braude P., Bolton V., Moore S. Human gene expression first occurs between the four- and eight-cell stages of preimplantation development. Nature. 1988;332:459-461. 10.1038/332459a06163
[4]McCoy R.C., Demko Z.P., Ryan A. Evidence of selection against complex mitotic-origin aneuploidy during preimplantation development. PLoS Genet. 2015;11:e1005601. 10.1371/journal.pgen.100560110
[5]Mastenbroek S., Twisk M., van der Veen F., Repping S. Preimplantation genetic screening: a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs. Hum Reprod Update. 2011;17:454-466. 10.1093/humupd/dmr0034
[6]Scott R.T. Jr., Upham K.M., Forman E.J., Zhao T., Treff N.R. Cleavage-stage biopsy significantly impairs human embryonic implantation potential while blastocyst biopsy does not: a randomized and paired clinical trial. Fertil Steril. 2013;100:624-630. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.04.0393
[7]Treff N.R., Su J., Tao X., Northrop L.E., Scott R.T. Jr. Single-cell whole-genome amplification technique impacts the accuracy of SNP microarray-based genotyping and copy number analyses. Mol Hum Reprod. 2011;17:335-343. 10.1093/molehr/gaq1036
[8]Van der Aa N., Cheng J., Mateiu L. Genome-wide copy number profiling of single cells in S-phase reveals DNA-replication domains. Nucleic Acids Res. 2013;41:e66. 10.1093/nar/gks13526
[9]Rubio C., Bellver J., Rodrigo L. fertilization with preimplantation genetic diagnosis for aneuploidies in advanced maternal age: a randomized, controlled study. Fertil Steril. 2017;107:1122-1129. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.03.011In vitro5
[10]Verpoest W., Staessen C.P.M.B., Goossens V. Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy by microarray analysis of polar bodies in advanced maternal age: a randomized clinical trial. Hum Reprod. 2018;33:1767-1776. 10.1093/humrep/dey2629
[11]Capalbo A., Bono S., Spizzichino L. Sequential comprehensive chromosome analysis on polar bodies, blastomeres and trophoblast: insights into female meiotic errors and chromosomal segregation in the preimplantation window of embryo development. Hum Reprod. 2013;28:509-518. 10.1093/humrep/des3942
[12]Handyside A.H., Montag M., Magli M.C. Multiple meiotic errors caused by predivision of chromatids in women of advanced maternal age undergoing fertilisation. Eur J Hum Genet. 2012;20:742-747. 10.1038/ejhg.2011.272in vitro7
[13]McArthur S.J., Leigh D., Marshall J.T., de Boer K.A., Jansen R.P. Pregnancies and live births after trophectoderm biopsy and preimplantation genetic testing of human blastocysts. Fertil Steril. 2005;84:1628-1636. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.05.0636
[14]Capalbo A., Rienzi L., Cimadomo D. Correlation between standard blastocyst morphology, euploidy and implantation: an observational study in two centers involving 956 screened blastocysts. Hum Reprod. 2014;29:1173-1181. 10.1093/humrep/deu0336
[15]Kokkali G., Vrettou C., Traeger-Synodinos J. Birth of a healthy infant following trophectoderm biopsy from blastocysts for PGD of beta-thalassaemia major. Hum Reprod. 2005;20:1855-1859. 10.1093/humrep/deh8937
[16]Cimadomo D., Capalbo A., Ubaldi F.M. The impact of biopsy on human embryo developmental potential during preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Biomed Res Int. 2016;2016:7193075. 10.1155/2016/7193075
[17]Cimadomo D., Rienzi L., Romanelli V. Inconclusive chromosomal assessment after blastocyst biopsy: prevalence, causative factors and outcomes after re-biopsy and re-vitrification. A multicenter experience. Hum Reprod. 2018;33:1839-1846. 10.1093/humrep/dey28210
[18]Capalbo A., Ubaldi F.M., Cimadomo D. Consistent and reproducible outcomes of blastocyst biopsy and aneuploidy screening across different biopsy practitioners: a multicentre study involving 2586 embryo biopsies. Hum Reprod. 2016;31:199-208. 10.1093/humrep/dev2941
[19]Cimadomo D., Capalbo A., Levi-Setti P.E. Associations of blastocyst features, trophectoderm biopsy and other laboratory practice with post-warming behavior and implantation. Hum Reprod. 2018;33:1992-2001. 10.1093/humrep/dey29111
[20]Dahdouh E.M., Balayla J., Garcia-Velasco J.A. Comprehensive chromosome screening improves embryo selection: a meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2015;104:1503-1512. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.08.0386
[21]Chen M., Wei S., Hu J., Quan S. Can Comprehensive Chromosome Screening Technology Improve IVF/ICSI Outcomes? A Meta-Analysis. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0140779. 10.1371/journal.pone.014077910
[22]Practice Committees of the American Society for Reproductive M, the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. The use of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A): a committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2018;109:429-436. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.01.0023
[23]Kim M.S., Kim J., Youm H.W., Park J.Y., Choi H.Y., Jee B.C. Embryonic development in human oocytes fertilized by split insemination. Obstet Gynecol Sci. 2015;58:217-222. 10.5468/ogs.2015.58.3.2173
[24]Johnson L.N., Sasson I.E., Sammel M.D., Dokras A. Does intracytoplasmic sperm injection improve the fertilization rate and decrease the total fertilization failure rate in couples with well-defined unexplained infertility? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2013;100:704-711. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.04.0383
[25]Bhattacharya S., Hamilton M.P., Shaaban M. Conventional fertilisation intracytoplasmic sperm injection for the treatment of non-male-factor infertility: a randomised controlled trial. Lancet. 2001;357:2075-2079. in-vitroversus9274
[26]Boulet S.L., Mehta A., Kissin D.M., Warner L., Kawwass J.F., Jamieson D.J. Trends in use of and reproductive outcomes associated with intracytoplasmic sperm injection. JAMA. 2015;313:255-263. 10.1001/jama.2014.179853
[27]Nelson S.M., Lawlor D.A. Predicting live birth, preterm delivery, and low birth weight in infants born from fertilisation: a prospective study of 144,018 treatment cycles. PLoS Med. 2011;8:e1000386. 10.1371/journal.pmed.1000386in vitro1
[28]Bonduelle M., Van Assche E., Joris H. Prenatal testing in ICSI pregnancies: incidence of chromosomal anomalies in 1586 karyotypes and relation to sperm parameters. Hum Reprod. 2002;17:2600-2614. 10
[29]Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive M, Practice Committee of the Society for Assisted Reproductive T. Genetic considerations related to intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). Fertil Steril. 2006;86:S103-S105. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2006.07.14895 Suppl. 1
[30]Hansen M., Kurinczuk J.J., Bower C., Webb S. The risk of major birth defects after intracytoplasmic sperm injection and fertilization. N Engl J Med. 2002;346:725-730. 10.1056/NEJMoa010035in vitro10
[31]Bonduelle M., Wennerholm U.B., Loft A. A multi-centre cohort study of the physical health of 5-year-old children conceived after intracytoplasmic sperm injection, fertilization and natural conception. Hum Reprod. 2005;20:413-419. 10.1093/humrep/deh592in vitro2
[32]Cox G.F., Burger J., Lip V. Intracytoplasmic sperm injection may increase the risk of imprinting defects. Am J Hum Genet. 2002;71:162-164. 10.1086/3410961
[33]Nikolettos N., Asimakopoulos B., Papastefanou I.S. Intracytoplasmic sperm injection--an assisted reproduction technique that should make us cautious about imprinting deregulation. J Soc Gynecol Investig. 2006;13:317-328. 10.1016/j.jsgi.2006.04.0025
[34]Glujovsky D., Farquhar C., Quinteiro Retamar A.M., Alvarez Sedo C.R., Blake D. Cleavage stage blastocyst stage embryo transfer in assisted reproductive technology. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;6:CD002118. 10.1002/14651858.CD002118.pub5versus
[35]Wale P.L., Gardner D.K. The effects of chemical and physical factors on mammalian embryo culture and their importance for the practice of assisted human reproduction. Hum Reprod Update. 2016;22:2-22. 10.1093/humupd/dmv0341
[36]Sfontouris I.A., Martins W.P., Nastri C.O. Blastocyst culture using single sequential media in clinical IVF: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2016;33:1261-1272. 10.1007/s10815-016-0774-5versus10
[37]Pennetta F., Lagalla C., Borini A. Embryo morphokinetic characteristics and euploidy. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2018;30:185-196. 10.1097/GCO.00000000000004533
[38]Armstrong S., Bhide P., Jordan V., Pacey A., Farquhar C. Time-lapse systems for embryo incubation and assessment in assisted reproduction. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018;5:CD011320. 10.1002/14651858.CD011320.pub3
[39]Bontekoe S., Mantikou E., van Wely M., Seshadri S., Repping S., Mastenbroek S. Low oxygen concentrations for embryo culture in assisted reproductive technologies. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012;7:CD008950. 10.1002/14651858.CD008950.pub2
[40]Nastri C.O., Nobrega B.N., Teixeira D.M. Low atmospheric oxygen tension for embryo culture in assisted reproduction: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2016;106:95-104 e17. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.02.037versus1
[41]Dar S., Lazer T., Shah P.S., Librach C.L. Neonatal outcomes among singleton births after blastocyst cleavage stage embryo transfer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2014;20:439-448. 10.1093/humupd/dmu001versus3
[42]Ginstrom Ernstad E., Bergh C., Khatibi A. Neonatal and maternal outcome after blastocyst transfer: a population-based registry study. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;214:378 e1-e10. 10.1016/j.ajog.2015.12.0403
[43]Wang X., Du M., Guan Y., Wang B., Zhang J., Liu Z. Comparative neonatal outcomes in singleton births from blastocyst transfers or cleavage-stage embryo transfers: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2017;15:36. 10.1186/s12958-017-0255-41
[44]Martins W.P., Nastri C.O., Rienzi L., van der Poel S.Z., Gracia C.R., Racowsky C. Obstetrical and perinatal outcomes following blastocyst transfer compared to cleavage transfer: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod. 2016;31:2561-2569. 10.1093/humrep/dew24411
[45]Christianson M.S., Zhao Y., Shoham G. Embryo catheter loading and embryo culture techniques: results of a worldwide Web-based survey. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2014;31:1029-1036. 10.1007/s10815-014-0250-z8
[46]Oron G., Nayot D., Son W.Y., Holzer H., Buckett W., Tulandi T. Obstetric and perinatal outcome from single cleavage transfer and single blastocyst transfer: a matched case-control study. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2015;31:469-472. 10.3109/09513590.2015.10066156
[47]Chambers G.M., Chughtai A.A., Farquhar C.M., Wang Y.A. Risk of preterm birth after blastocyst embryo transfer: a large population study using contemporary registry data from Australia and New Zealand. Fertil Steril. 2015;104:997-1003. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.07.11304
[48]European IVFMCftESoHR, Embryology, Calhaz-Jorge C. Assisted reproductive technology in Europe, 2012: results generated from European registers by ESHRE. Hum Reprod. 2016;31:1638-1652. 10.1093/humrep/dew1518
[49]Edgar D.H., Gook D.A. A critical appraisal of cryopreservation (slow cooling vitrification) of human oocytes and embryos. Hum Reprod Update. 2012;18:536-554. 10.1093/humupd/dms016versus5
[50]Rienzi L., Gracia C., Maggiulli R. Oocyte, embryo and blastocyst cryopreservation in ART: systematic review and meta-analysis comparing slow-freezing vitrification to produce evidence for the development of global guidance. Hum Reprod Update. 2017;23:139-155. 10.1093/humupd/dmw038versus2
[51]Practice Committees of American Society for Reproductive M, Society for Assisted Reproductive T. Mature oocyte cryopreservation: a guideline. Fertil Steril. 2013;99:37-43. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.09.0281
[52]Lee H., McCulloh D.H., Olivares R., Goldstein-Tufaro A., McCaffrey C., Grifo J. Live births after transfer of rebiopsy and revitrification of blastocyst that had “no diagnosis” following trophectoderm biopsy. Fertil Steril. 2016;106:e164. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.07.4833
[53]Wong K.M., van Wely M., Mol F., Repping S., Mastenbroek S. Fresh frozen embryo transfers in assisted reproduction. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;3:CD011184. 10.1002/14651858.CD011184.pub2versus
[54]Maheshwari A., Pandey S., Shetty A., Hamilton M., Bhattacharya S. Obstetric and perinatal outcomes in singleton pregnancies resulting from the transfer of frozen thawed fresh embryos generated through fertilization treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2012;98:368-77 e1-9. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.05.019versusin vitro2
[56]Haouzi D., Assou S., Mahmoud K. Gene expression profile of human endometrial receptivity: comparison between natural and stimulated cycles for the same patients. Hum Reprod. 2009;24:1436-1445. 10.1093/humrep/dep0396
[57]Johnson A., Wapner R.J., Davis G.H., Jackson L.G. Mosaicism in chorionic villus sampling: an association with poor perinatal outcome. Obstet Gynecol. 1990;75:573-577. 4
[58]Wapner R.J., Simpson J.L., Golbus M.S. Chorionic mosaicism: association with fetal loss but not with adverse perinatal outcome. Prenat Diagn. 1992;12:347-355. 5
[59]Wilkins-Haug L., Roberts D.J., Morton C.C. Confined placental mosaicism and intrauterine growth retardation: a case-control analysis of placentas at delivery. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1995;172:44-50. 1 Pt 1
[60]Malvestiti F., Agrati C., Grimi B. Interpreting mosaicism in chorionic villi: results of a monocentric series of 1001 mosaics in chorionic villi with follow-up amniocentesis. Prenat Diagn. 2015;35:1117-1127. 10.1002/pd.465611
[61]Taylor T.H., Gitlin S.A., Patrick J.L., Crain J.L., Wilson J.M., Griffin D.K. The origin, mechanisms, incidence and clinical consequences of chromosomal mosaicism in humans. Hum Reprod Update. 2014;20:571-581. 10.1093/humupd/dmu0164
[62]Capalbo A., Ubaldi F.M., Rienzi L., Scott R., Treff N. Detecting mosaicism in trophectoderm biopsies: current challenges and future possibilities. Hum Reprod. 2016;32:492-498. 10.1093/humrep/dew2503
[63]Mertzanidou A., Wilton L., Cheng J. Microarray analysis reveals abnormal chromosomal complements in over 70% of 14 normally developing human embryos. Hum Reprod. 2013;28:256-264. 10.1093/humrep/des3621
[64]Vanneste E., Voet T., Le Caignec C. Chromosome instability is common in human cleavage-stage embryos. Nat Med. 2009;15:577-583. 10.1038/nm.19245
[65]Capalbo A., Rienzi L., Ubaldi F.M. Diagnosis and clinical management of duplications and deletions. Fertil Steril. 2017;107:12-18. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.11.0021
[66]Greco E., Minasi M.G., Fiorentino F. Healthy Babies after Intrauterine Transfer of Mosaic Aneuploid Blastocysts. N Engl J Med. 2015;373:2089-2090. 10.1056/NEJMc150042121
[67]Spinella F., Fiorentino F., Biricik A. Extent of chromosomal mosaicism influences the clinical outcome of fertilization treatments. Fertil Steril. 2018;109:77-83. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.09.025in vitro1
[68]Capalbo A., Treff N.R., Cimadomo D. Comparison of array comparative genomic hybridization and quantitative real-time PCR-based aneuploidy screening of blastocyst biopsies. Eur J Hum Genet. 2015;23:901-906. 10.1038/ejhg.2014.2227
[69]Goodrich D., Tao X., Bohrer C. A randomized and blinded comparison of qPCR and NGS-based detection of aneuploidy in a cell line mixture model of blastocyst biopsy mosaicism. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2016;33:1473-1480. 10.1007/s10815-016-0784-311
[70]Treff N.R., Franasiak J.M. Detection of segmental aneuploidy and mosaicism in the human preimplantation embryo: technical considerations and limitations. Fertil Steril. 2017;107:27-31. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.09.0391
[71]Johnson D.S., Cinnioglu C., Ross R. Comprehensive analysis of karyotypic mosaicism between trophectoderm and inner cell mass. Mol Hum Reprod. 2010;16:944-949. 10.1093/molehr/gaq06212
[72]Northrop L.E., Treff N.R., Levy B., Scott R.T. Jr. SNP microarray-based 24 chromosome aneuploidy screening demonstrates that cleavage-stage FISH poorly predicts aneuploidy in embryos that develop to morphologically normal blastocysts. Mol Hum Reprod. 2010;16:590-600. 10.1093/molehr/gaq0378
[73]Fragouli E., Alfarawati S., Daphnis D.D. Cytogenetic analysis of human blastocysts with the use of FISH, CGH and aCGH: scientific data and technical evaluation. Hum Reprod. 2011;26:480-490. 10.1093/humrep/deq3442
[74]Capalbo A., Wright G., Elliott T., Ubaldi F.M., Rienzi L., Nagy Z.P. FISH reanalysis of inner cell mass and trophectoderm samples of previously array-CGH screened blastocysts shows high accuracy of diagnosis and no major diagnostic impact of mosaicism at the blastocyst stage. Hum Reprod. 2013;28:2298-2307. 10.1093/humrep/det2458
[75]Huang J., Yan L., Lu S., Zhao N., Qiao J. Re-analysis of aneuploidy blastocysts with an inner cell mass and different regional trophectoderm cells. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2017;34:487-493. 10.1007/s10815-017-0875-94
[76]Popovic M., Dheedene A., Christodoulou C. Chromosomal mosaicism in human blastocysts: the ultimate challenge of preimplantation genetic testing? Hum Reprod. 2018;33:1342-1354. 10.1093/humrep/dey1067
[77]Victor A.R., Griffin D.K., Brake A.J. Assessment of aneuploidy concordance between clinical trophectoderm biopsy and blastocyst. Hum Reprod. 2019;34:181-192. 10.1093/humrep/dey3271
[78]Munne S., Blazek J., Large M. Detailed investigation into the cytogenetic constitution and pregnancy outcome of replacing mosaic blastocysts detected with the use of high-resolution next-generation sequencing. Fertil Steril. 2017;108:62-71 e8. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.05.0021
[79]Huang A., Adusumalli J., Patel S., Liem J., Williams J. 3rd., Pisarska M.D. Prevalence of chromosomal mosaicism in pregnancies from couples with infertility. Fertil Steril. 2009;91:2355-2360. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.03.0446
[80]Scott R.T. Jr., Ferry K., Su J., Tao X., Scott K., Treff N.R. Comprehensive chromosome screening is highly predictive of the reproductive potential of human embryos: a prospective, blinded, nonselection study. Fertil Steril. 2012;97:870-875. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.01.1044
[81]Ubaldi F.M., Capalbo A., Colamaria S. Reduction of multiple pregnancies in the advanced maternal age population after implementation of an elective single embryo transfer policy coupled with enhanced embryo selection: pre- and post-intervention study. Hum Reprod. 2015;30:2097-2106. 10.1093/humrep/dev1599