ArticleAvicenna journal of medical biotechnology2013
A technique for facile and precise transfer of mouse embryos.
Article in Avicenna journal of medical biotechnology, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- Nanoparticle-mediated genome editing in single-cell embryos via peptide nucleic acids.Bioengineering & translational medicine · 2023Article
- Effect of Predator Stress on the Reproductive Performance of Female Mice After Nonsurgical Embryo Transfer.Journal of the American Association for Laboratory Animal Science : JAALAS · 2019Article
- A Study on Merits and Demerits of Two Main Gene Silencing Techniques in Mice.Iranian journal of biotechnology · 2018Article
- Article
- The Effect of Angiotensin on the Quality of In Vitro Produced (IVP) Sheep Embryos and Expression of Na(+)/K(+)/ATPase.Avicenna journal of medical biotechnologyArticle
- The Effect of Media Supplementation with Angiotensin on Developmental Competence of Ovine Embryos Derived from Vitrified-warmed Oocytes.Avicenna journal of medical biotechnologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundSuccessful Embryo Transfer (ET) technique is a fateful step of all efforts to achieve live births from in vitro produced embryos in assisted reproductive techniques or in knockout, transgenic or cloned animal projects. Small reproductive tract of mice and limitation of current techniques may not well satisfy the requirements for mass production of genetically modified mice. Genetic abnormalities of embryos, receptivity and uterine contractions, expulsion of embryos, blood, mucus or bacterial contamination on the transfer pipette tip, technical problems and even animal strain may affect embryo transfer outcome.
methodsIn this study, two techniques of embryo transfer in mice were compared. In conventional technique the oviduct wall was punctured with a 30-gauge needle and the loaded Pasteur pipette with embryos and medium was inserted into the hole. In new technique, embryos that were loaded in modified micropipette with minimal medium were transferred directly to the oviduct by manual piston micro-pump easily. Embryo viability was evaluated considering the percentage of live healthy newborns.
resultsResults of the two techniques were compared by t-test within the NPAR1WAY procedure of SAS software (ver. 9.2). The average live birth rates in the novel methods was significantly higher (42.4%) than the conventional method (21.7%, p<0.05).
conclusionIn conclusion, using new embryo transfer technique improved birth rate by preventing embryos expulsion from the oviduct, saving time and easy transfer of embryos with minimum volume of medium.
Indexed as
Identifiers
23626878PMC3572708W2129019290What 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.