Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23838796›Full record

ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2013

Vitrification of blastocysts derived from fair to poor quality cleavage stage embryos can produce high pregnancy rates after warming.

Chloë Shaw-Jackson, Evelyne Bertrand, Bénédicte Becker, Jérôme Colin, Caroline Beaudoin-Chabot, Serge Rozenberg, Candice Autin

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Extended culture of poor-quality supernumerary embryos improves ART outcomes.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2018
    Article
  12. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Chloë Shaw-JacksonDepartment of Gynaecology, CHU St Pierre, (Université Libre de Bruxelles), rue Haute 322, Brussels, 1000, Belgium, Chloe_SHAW-JACKSON@stpierre-bru.be.
Evelyne Bertrand
Bénédicte Becker
Jérôme Colin
Caroline Beaudoin-Chabot
Serge Rozenberg
Candice Autin

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeThis study investigates whether certain embryos considered unsuitable for cryopreservation on day 3 might nevertheless have the potential to develop into worthwhile blastocysts that could be vitrified in the same cycle.

methodsRetrospective study: between 2010 and 2011, embryo transfers and cryopreservation took place mainly on day 3 in our centre. Supernumerary embryos of intermediate to poor quality were reassessed on days 5/6 and any good quality blastocysts were vitrified.

resultsOut of 914 cleavage stage (day 3) embryos left in culture, 16 % were vitrified on days 5/6. Fifty blastocyst warming cycles resulted in a 76 % survival rate, 44 % clinical pregnancy rate and 39 % implantation rate. During the same time period, 213 warming cycles of good quality cleavage stage embryos rendered survival rates, clinical pregnancy and implantation rates of 97 %, 23 % and 16 % respectively.

conclusionsSupernumerary average quality day 3 embryos should be given a second chance to be selected for cryopreservation. If blastocysts are obtained and survive vitrification, there is a good chance of implantation thus reducing embryo waste.

Indexed as

Embryo Culture TechniquesPregnancy RateVitrificationBlastocystEmbryo ImplantationEmbryonic DevelopmentEmbryo TransferFemaleHumansPregnancyRetrospective Studies

Identifiers

PMID23838796
PMCPMC3790109

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.