Trial reportHuman reproduction (Oxford, England)2011
A pragmatic RCT of conventional versus increased concentration sucrose in freezing and thawing solutions for human embryos.
Trial report in Human reproduction (Oxford, England), 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- A randomized controlled trial comparing two vitrification methods versus slow-freezing for cryopreservation of human cleavage stage embryos.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2014Trial
- Human embryo cryopreservation: one-step slow freezing does it all?Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundIntact frozen-thawed embryos have a greater potential than damaged embryos to establish successful pregnancies. This study aimed to determine whether elevated concentrations of sucrose during freezing would increase the proportion of patients with ≥ 50% of embryos intact after thawing (primary outcome), and improve clinical outcome.
methodsIn a two arm, parallel group, pragmatic trial, IVF/ICSI couples were randomized prospectively to have their supernumerary embryos frozen in a medium containing 0.1 M sucrose (control; n = 99) or 0.3 M sucrose (intervention; n = 102).
resultsMore control (74/99) than intervention (63/102) couples had at least one embryo thawed (P = 0.07). Significantly more (P = 0.005) intervention (53/63) than control (45/74) couples had ≥ 50% of embryos intact. Freezing in a medium containing 0.3 M sucrose increased by 3.4-fold [95% confidence interval (CI) (1.45, 7.82)] the likelihood of a couple having ≥ 50% of their embryos intact. In the fresh cycle, live birth rate per transfer was similar in the control (35/95) and intervention (36/93) groups (P = 0.91). More control (19/63) than intervention (9/59) couples had a live birth after frozen embryo transfer (P = 0.08). When fresh and frozen cycles were combined, fewer intervention (n = 102) than control (n = 99) couples had at least one live birth (42 versus 53%). The difference in cumulative live birth rate was not significant [hazard ratio = 0.75, 95% CI (0.49, 1.13); P = 0.17].
conclusionsIncreasing the concentration of sucrose in the freezing medium improves embryo survival, but this is not reflected by increased cumulative birth rates. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN93314892.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.