Committed to the Prevention of Genetic Disease

The Need

Growing public awareness of the genetic basis of inherited
disease has created demand for screening and prevention
for prospective parents planning families. Despite this
demand, the options for prospective parents are limited.

Current Practice - Limited Options Today

Prospective parents are faced with limited and invasive options for prenatal diagnoses of genetic diseases.
The vast majority of prenatal testing is performed 8-16 weeks during pregnancy. Today, following the detection of a
chromosomal abnormality, in excess of 90% of the pregnancies are terminated.1


Genetic counseling only informs couples of risk factors for an inherited disorder. Couples are advised of the consequences, nature of the disorder and the probability of developing or transmitting it to the child. Couples at-risk face a tough choice: not having a baby or taking the risk that it will be born with a genetic disease.


Empiric Risk

Only informs of empiric risk for transmission of genetic disorder.


Prenatal testing such as Amniocentesis, CVS and Free Cell DNA are performed 8-16 weeks during pregnancy. Of couples who are told their baby carries an abnormality, more than 90% elect to terminate their pregnancy.1

May Lead

to Termination

With detection of genetic disorder, more than 90% of pregnancies are terminated.1


IVF developed embryos have a 20-25% delivery rate for Single Embryo Transfer (SET).2 Historical data has shown in vivo developed embryos will produce higher implantation rates than IVF embryos.3,4


Delivery Rate 2

Current methods - inefficient, costly and invasive.

Previvo Uterine Lavage - A New Choice

With Previvo Uterine Lavage, the advantage lies in the ability to develop and recover in vivo blastocysts from the
uterus of a woman. The blastocyst biopsy is now considered by many experts to be the procedure of choice for
PGS and PGD testing.5 Our key advantages include:

In Vivo


In vivo developed blastocysts are
historically known to implant at higher
rates than IVF fertilized eggs.3,4



Previvo Uterine Lavage allows for natural conception, in vivo. Current IVF/PGD practice requires conception within a laboratory.



Previvo Uterine Lavage is a non-surgical, minimally invasive procedure that is performed without anesthesia within a physician’s office.



By harvesting in vivo blastocysts,
pre-pregnancy genetic diagnosis
can be performed.

Not Just


The combination of Previvo Uterine Lavage
and PGS/PGD provides the potential to
avoid hundreds of genetic diseases.

New Option

for Fertile Couples

Previvo Uterine Lavage provides a
new option for any fertile couple that
wishes to screen for genetic disease.


of Mind

Previvo Uterine Lavage provides
preventive testing options
prior to pregnancy.



Once the blastocysts are screened
for a specific genetic disease and found unaffected they are cryopreserved
and replaced when the couple wishes.

Day 5


Blastocyst stage biopsy is now
considered by many experts to be
the biopsy procedure of choice for
PGS and PGD testing.5

1. Quadrelli R, Quadrelli A, Mechoso B, Laufer M, Jaumandreu C, Vaglio A. Parental decisions to abort or continue a pregnancy following prenatal diagnosis of chromosomal abnormalities in a setting where termination of pregnancy is not legally available. Prenat Diagn. 2007 Mar;27(3):228-32.
2. P.O. Karlstrom and C. Bergh.Reducing the number of embryos transferred in Sweden-impact on delivery and multiple birth rates. Human Reproduction Vol.22, No.8, pp. 2202–2207, 2007.
3. Buster JE, Bustillo M, Rodi IA, Cohen SW, Hamilton M, Simon JA, Thorneycroft IH, Marshall JR. RG. Biologic and morphologic development of donated human ova recovered by nonsurgical uterine lavage. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1985 Sep 15;153(2):211-7.
4. Sauer MV, Bustillo M, Rodi IA, Gorrill MJ, Buster JE. In-vivo blastocyst production and ovum yield among fertile women. Hum Reprod. 1987 Nov;2(8):701-3.
5. Scott KL, Hong KH, Scott RT Jr. Selecting the optimal time to perform biopsy for preimplantation genetic testing. Fertil Steril. 2013 Sep;100(3):608-14.