Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19821435›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2009

Techniques for preparation prior to embryo transfer.

Roos S Derks, Cindy Farquhar, Ben Willem J Mol, Karen Buckingham, Maas Jan Heineman

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
2.5field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

12 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 33 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Antibiotics prior to or at the time of embryo transfer in ART.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Oxytocin antagonists for assisted reproduction.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021
    Pooled it
  3. Temperature of embryo culture for assisted reproduction.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2019
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Assisted reproductive technology: an overview of Cochrane Reviews.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2018
    Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Is modified embryo transfer technique related to an increased pregnancy rate?Journal of the Chinese Medical Association : JCMA · 2021
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Roos S DerksAmsterdam Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, Amsterdam, Netherlands, 1100 DD.
Cindy Farquhar
Ben Willem J Mol
Karen Buckingham
Maas Jan Heineman
University of Amsterdam · NLMáxima Medisch Centrum · NLSt John New Zealand · NZUniversity of Auckland · NZ

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEmbryo transfer (ET) is the final and most vulnerable step in in vitro fertilisation (IVF) treatment. Pregnancy rates after ET may be influenced by several factors including cervical preparation, the performance of a dummy or mock transfer, the choice of catheter, the use of ultrasound guidance, removing the mucus or blood on the catheter, and straightening of the utero-cervical angle. Recent research has focused on improving the embryo transfer technique in the hope of increasing the success rates of IVF. This review focused on preparation techniques as it is unclear whether these simple interventions will make ET an easier procedure with higher success rates and lower complication rates.

objectivesTo determine whether different preparation techniques prior to ET result in improved IVF outcomes. SEARCH STRATEGY: The Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and PsycINFO were searched (November 2008). The citation lists of relevant publications, reviews, and included studies were handsearched. Experts in the field were contacted to identify any unpublished trials. SELECTION CRITERIA: Only truly randomised controlled trials of the interventions straightening the utero-cervical angle, dummy transfer prior to ET, cervical and endometrial preparation, and embryo afterloading were included. The primary outcomes were live birth rate and pregnancy rate per woman randomised. Participants were women with any type of subfertility undergoing IVF treatment and reaching the ET stage. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors critically appraised potentially eligible studies. Ten studies were included in this review and data were independently extracted by two review authors. Disagreements were resolved by discussion and involvement of a third author. Risk of bias was also independently assessed by two authors. Dichotomous outcome data were expressed as Peto odds ratios. Subgroup analysis and the investigation of heterogeneity were planned. MAIN

resultsAt the time of ET, there was no evidence of benefit with the following interventions: full bladder, removal of cervical mucus, flushing the endocervical canal or the endometrial cavity. We did not identify any eligible studies for dummy transfer, changing patient position, the use of a tenaculum, or embryo afterloading. AUTHORS'

conclusionsOn the basis of the evidence in this review, no specific implications for practice are made. It is recommended, in general, that more, larger studies are done on ET preparation techniques. The studies need to be of a higher quality with better explained methods, more specified inclusion and exclusion criteria, and more participants.

Indexed as

Birth RateCervix MucusEmbryo TransferFemaleHumansLive BirthPregnancyPreoperative CareRandomized Controlled Trials as TopicTreatment OutcomeUterus

Identifiers

PMID19821435
OpenAlexW1838300800

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.