P-128 Role of PGT-A and ERA to optimise reproductive outcomes of couples with recurrent implantation failure

Abstract Study question In couples with Recurrent Implantation Failure (RIF), can Pre-implantation Genetic Testing for Aneuploidy (PGT-A) or Endometrial Receptive Array (ERA) help to optimise the reproductive outcomes? Summary answer RIF patients PGT-A ERA individually do not seem optimize outcomes. in-combination seems be a beneficial intervention. What is known already Role of and outcomes has been ambigious. this current study we wanted evaluate their efficacy in patients. design, size, duration This retrospective data undergone treatment at our private fertility centre from January 2014 July 2019. The population was divided four groups based on treatments offered: Group A: (n = 47) B: 54) C: ERA+PGT-A 49) D: No PGT-A/ 189) Participants/materials, setting, methods Couples minimum two failed transfers were recruited. ICSI method insemination. Blastocysts subjected genetic testing through Next-Generation Sequencing(NGS). All embryo performed Frozen Embryo Replacement Cycle(FET). done as per institutes Standard Operating Procedures(SOP) ET receptivity status. Elective Single Euploid Blastocyst transfer (eSET) grpB&C un-screened double Transfer (DET) grpA&D. Main results role chance Clinical Pregnancy Rate (CPR), Miscarriage (MR) (IR), Multiple Pregnanacy rates (MPR) Live Birth (LBR) evaluated all groups. Outcomes A, B, C & D follows: CPR – 68.09% Vs 62% 68.42% 70% IR 48.89% 47.50% 65.22% 45% MR 12.77% 9.25% 5.26% 17.89% MPR 16% 0% 17% LBR 51.06% 46.8% 63.16% comaparble between group have best IR, least miscarriage rates. For PGT when offered individually, doesn’t Limitations, reasons caution there need well designed RCT further validate conclusion study. Caution needs exercised while offering they incurr additional financial burden Wider implications findings cycles personalised window implantation single patinets also shorten time pregnancy. Trial registration number Not applicable