PGT-A (preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy)
A biopsy of the embryo to check it has the right number of chromosomes before transfer.
The verdict
Not recommended as a routine add-on; it may reduce your chance of a baby (especially under 35), though it can reduce the chance of miscarriage.
| Body | Position |
|---|---|
| HFEA |
|
| ESHRE | Not for routine use Not recommended for routine clinical use; specific groups (e.g. older patients) may benefit, but routine use isn't recommended without more evidence. Source |
| NICE | Do not offer (2026) NG257 1.48.1: do not offer PGT-A as part of fertility treatment to improve live birth rates. Source |
| ISAR | Role for age 36–40 & known-cause RPL ISAR PGT consensus: recommended for advanced maternal age (36–40) and repeated pregnancy loss with a known cause; not recommended for under-35 good-prognosis, unexplained RPL, or low-AMH patients; no evidence of efficacy in recurrent implantation failure. Source |
Cochrane evidence base
2020 review: insufficient evidence of a difference in cumulative live birth; possible miscarriage reduction on the first transfer only, cumulative data scarce.
In India
~₹23,000–30,000 per embryo (some clinics ₹25,000–50,000+ total), on top of base IVF.
- For most patients, no. HFEA rates it red for improving your chance of a baby because it is a selection tool that reduces the embryos available and can lengthen the time to conception; NICE advises not offering it to improve live birth rates.
- It can reduce the chance of miscarriage (HFEA rates it green for that), and the Indian society (ISAR) sees a role for women aged 36–40 or with known-cause recurrent pregnancy loss. It is not recommended for younger, good-prognosis patients.
Does PGT-A improve my chance of having a baby?
Is PGT-A ever worthwhile?
Sources
Take this further
Last reviewed .