A 2026 study explored how IVF patients emotionally navigated the decision to transfer embryos labelled “abnormal” by PGT-A, with many describing grief, uncertainty, and loss of trust in the testing process.
PGT-A is commonly used during IVF to screen embryos for chromosomal abnormalities. Many clinics won’t transfer embryos labelled “abnormal,” including embryos classified as aneuploid and, in some cases, mosaic embryos. But reports of healthy births from these embryos have led to uncertainty around how definitive PGT-A results really are.
For some patients, especially after years of infertility or failed IVF cycles, these embryos may represent their final opportunity to have a biological child.
To explore this, Takahashi et al. (2026) interviewed 21 IVF patients at a New York fertility clinic that was willing to consider transfer of embryos labelled abnormal after other clinics had refused. The researchers analyzed the interviews to identify common emotional themes in how patients understood risk, uncertainty, and the meaning of these embryos.
🔗 Original studies are referenced in this post or within the linked Remembryo posts.
💡 Reminder: Terms underlined with a dotted black line are linked to glossary entries. Clicking these does not count toward your paywall limit.
Not all “abnormal” embryos are the same
There are two broad categories of abnormal embryos, or non-euploid embryos, and they don’t all have the same chances of success after transfer:
- Some embryos are labelled fully aneuploid, meaning the biopsy suggests the entire embryo is aneuploid. Based on current data, embryos with whole chromosome aneuploidy tend to have very low success rates overall. In contrast, embryos with segmental aneuploidy, where only part of a chromosome is affected, tend to have higher success rates after transfer.
- Other embryos are labelled mosaic, meaning they contain a mix of euploid and aneuploid cells. Mosaic embryos can still lead to healthy live births, especially low level mosaics and segmental mosaics. Success rates vary depending on the type and level of mosaicism, but overall they appear to have much better outcomes than whole chromosome aneuploid embryos.
Clinics have different policies on what they’re willing to transfer. Some clinics routinely transfer mosaic embryos, while others are much more restrictive. Patients aren’t always fully aware of the different PGT-A classifications or success rates and may simply be told their embryos are “abnormal” and can’t be transferred.
What “abnormal” embryos meant to patients
The researchers identified several recurring themes across the interviews. For many patients, the embryos weren’t “abnormal” but were possible children that clinics had given up on.
Many participants stopped seeing the embryos as completely non-viable and instead viewed them as uncertain, but still possibly capable of becoming children. The authors described this shift as “reclaiming possibility.” This shaped many of the themes seen throughout the interviews, including growing distrust in PGT-A, frustration with clinic policies, the feeling that the embryos still deserved a chance, and the search for peace or closure after transfer.
Why some patients stopped trusting PGT-A
Most patients in the study didn’t start IVF questioning PGT-A. For many, doubts developed gradually after years of failed transfers, miscarriages, or being told they had no transferable embryos. Repeatedly being told to pursue more IVF cycles after embryos were labelled abnormal also broke down trust in the process.
Failed transfers involving euploid embryos made many question how certain the results really were. The “normal” label often gave them reassurance and high expectations, making failed outcomes even harder emotionally. Patients were also frustrated with different clinic policies and the feeling that some embryos were being treated as absolutely non-viable, despite reports of healthy births after transfer of embryos labelled “abnormal.”
“After the first one, I wasn’t too upset—sometimes embryos just don’t implant. The second one was harder because we miscarried her. We were so hopeful because the test had said it was ‘normal’.”
“And I have another doctor friend that transferred his wife one ‘aneuploid’, and they have a little girl, very healthy. So that’s the reason I believe that even though it is ‘aneuploid’, there’s always a chance to become a healthy baby.”
Some patients began questioning not just the PGT-A results themselves, but also the clinics, companies, and counselling surrounding the testing. Some also began wondering whether financial interests affected how embryos were labelled or discussed.
“When I talked to the genetic counsellor, for me, it was just routine, checking a box. I came to not care what they said—because they’re paid by the company they work for, and that company wants you to have only one “normal” embryo. That way, they can
discard the rest, and you’ll have to come back and pay for more cycles.”
Feeling that options were being taken away
Many participants felt frustrated by clinic policies that wouldn’t allow the transfer of abnormal embryos, often with little explanation. Some wondered why the embryos were frozen and stored at all if they were believed to have no chance of working.
“They just told me: ‘They’re not good’, And I said: ‘Well, what about the rest of them?’. And they said: ‘Oh, they weren’t good either’. That’s all they said. And at that point, you want to believe what your doctor is telling you, you know? So, I said: ‘Okay’. But I kept wondering, if they weren’t good, why were they kept? Is it common for the clinic to store embryos that are considered not viable?”
Others felt that decisions were being made for them instead of with them, especially when different clinics had very different rules about what embryos they would transfer. Some described feeling rejected because of the embryo’s label rather than their individual situation.
“We feel it is just discrimination. If we hadn’t tested, they would have happily transferred the embryos. Because we tested, they will not. We cannot transfer these embryos to another place because the law does not allow it. We will sign waivers, whatever, but they will not do it.”
For some patients, it didn’t make sense that clinics would refuse transfer of embryos that were otherwise going to be discarded.
“And this is, frankly, optional medical care. So, it’s a little different than ‘Hey, Doctor, can you do your heart surgery a little bit differently’. We’re talking about an embryo that you’re going to discard anyway. So, the risk of damage, the risk–reward balance, didn’t make any sense to me.”
Wanting to give the embryo a chance
After years of failed IVF cycles, miscarriages, and being told their embryos were abnormal, many patients felt transfer was their last chance to have a biological child. For some, discarding the embryos felt harder than accepting the uncertainty and risks of transfer.
Many described the decision in emotional or moral terms, not just medical ones. Some saw the embryos as possible children and felt they had a responsibility to at least try, even if the chances of success were low.
“I was having a hard time morally. Those embryos were mine and my partner’s. We knew the gender, we knew the chromosomes–to us, those were our babies. I said: ‘If they were going to die, they were going to die with me as their mother’’
“Giving a try is simply better than no baby at all…I have been through so much. So, I have nothing else to lose. I can’t be more
hurt by the process’’
Several participants also said they wished they had never done PGT-A, because knowing the embryo’s genetic results sometimes made the decision harder emotionally. Some coped with the uncertainty by believing that either the embryo would become a healthy baby, or the pregnancy wouldn’t continue.
How patients felt after the transfer
Whether the transfer resulted in a live birth, miscarriage, or failed implantation, many participants said the experience still gave them a sense of peace or closure. Even when transfers failed, most didn’t feel they made the wrong decision.
Many described the transfer as meaningful because it allowed them to feel they tried every possible option. Failed transfers also didn’t necessarily restore confidence in PGT-A. Instead, many continued to see the results as uncertain rather than absolute.
Some participants even said failed transfers of embryos labelled “abnormal” felt emotionally easier than failed transfers of embryos labelled “normal,” because they went into the process already expecting uncertainty.
Parents who had healthy live births often described gratitude, but some also said the “abnormal” label never fully disappeared emotionally. Even with healthy children, some still worried about developmental milestones or future health problems.
“I think every time she reaches a milestone, like counting, talking, you know, running, walking. I think I will always, always be on the lookout, although there is nothing to be on the lookout for. She’s, thank God, a normal, beautiful, healthy, smart baby. I’m like 99.9% it’s not relevant anymore, but there is always going to be a tiny fear in me that I didn’t have with my other children. A fear in me and in my husband too. I’m sure that there’s always going to be, Oh, my God, what if. What if? What if? What if?”
Conclusion
This study explored what happens emotionally when patients are told their PGT-A tested embryos are “abnormal,” especially after years of infertility, failed IVF cycles, miscarriages, or being told they have “no transferable embryos.”
One important point is that not all embryos labelled “abnormal” seem to have the same chances of success. Based on current research, embryos with whole chromosome abnormalities appear to have very low live birth rates overall, around ~1%. In contrast, mosaic and segmental embryos have higher rates of live birth. This matters because these very different embryo types are often grouped together under the same “abnormal” label. Similarly, whole chromosome aneuploid and segmental aneuploids are often both treated as “aneuploid,” despite research showing different success rates.
The study highlights how inconsistent messaging around PGT-A has added to patient confusion and distrust. Major organizations like the ASRM and HFEA don’t currently recommend routine PGT-A for all patients because studies haven’t consistently shown higher live birth rates after euploid vs untested embryo transfer, especially in younger patients. However, the focus on transferring euploids in these studies may overlook the fact that other embryo types can also lead to live birth, while whole chromosome aneuploids specifically appear to have extremely low success rates. The clearest value of PGT-A may be in helping avoid transfer of whole chromosome aneuploids specifically in order to reduce the risk of miscarriage or implantation failure.
Clearer guidance from these organizations is needed on how different categories of embryos should be discussed and managed so patients receive more consistent information about their options and what current research actually shows. Without clearer guidance, clinics may continue grouping very different non-euploid embryos together under a single “abnormal” label, which could limit potentially viable options for patients.
Better counselling is also needed before PGT-A is done, including honest discussions about uncertainty, success rates, clinic transfer policies, and what options patients may face if embryos come back labelled abnormal. Patients should understand that even euploid embryos may not work.
Ultimately, this paper highlights a growing problem in IVF: the science, clinic policies, and patient expectations around PGT-A don’t always match. And when that happens, patients are left trying to make complex and emotional decisions on their own, relying on a mix of clinic advice and social media discussions to make sense of uncertain PGT-A results.
Want to read more about PGT-A and “abnormal” embryo transfers?
This post covers PGT-A (formerly called PGS testing), including how it works, how accurate it is, whether it can damage embryos, how to read PGT-A reports, success rates, mosaic embryos, and why even euploid embryos sometimes fail. Read more.
The ASRM has released their 2024 committee opinion on the use of PGT-A, covering the use of PGT-A for patients with a good prognosis, advanced age, donor eggs, recurrent pregnancy loss and more. Read more.
This post covers mosaic embryos, including their definition, frequency after PGT-A, mosaic embryo levels (low level, high level), mosaic embryo types (whole chromosome, segmental), current guidelines for transfer, potential for self-correction, and success rates. Read more.
Aneuploid embryo success rates after transfer are very low, with about 1–2% leading to a live birth, likely due to undetected mosaicism after PGT-A rather than true whole chromosome aneuploidy. Read more.
Reference
Shizuko Takahashi, Sonia Gayete-Lafuente, Elizabeth Choong, Lara Guijarro-Baude, David H Barad, Pasquale Patrizio, Michael Dunn, Julian Savulescu, Norbert Gleicher, Reclaiming ‘abnormal’ embryos after preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy: patients’ perspectives on transferring embryos against prior institutional advice, Human Reproduction Open, Volume 2026, Issue 2, 2026, hoag025, https://doi.org/10.1093/hropen/hoag025
About Embryoman
Embryoman (Sean Lauber) is a former embryologist and the founder of Remembryo, an IVF research and fertility education website. After working in an IVF lab in the US, he returned to Canada and now focuses on making fertility research more accessible. He holds a Master’s in Immunology and launched Remembryo in 2018 to help patients and professionals make sense of IVF research. Sean shares weekly study updates on Facebook, Instagram, and Reddit regularly. He also answers questions on Reddit or in his private Facebook group.