Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26241855›Full record

SynthesisPloS one2015

In Vitro Maturation in Women with vs. without Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Charalampos Siristatidis, Theodoros N Sergentanis, Paraskevi Vogiatzi, Prodromos Kanavidis, Charalampos Chrelias, Nikolaos Papantoniou, Theodora Psaltopoulou

Abstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 30 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
30citing papers in PubMed, 3 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

30 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. New Insights on In Vitro Maturation of Oocytes for Fertility Preservation.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Review
  8. Review
  9. The spectrum ofFrontiers in endocrinology · 2023
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Perspectives on the development and future of oocyte IVM in clinical practice.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2021
    Review
  14. Article
  15. Turkish journal of obstetrics and gynecology · 2020
    Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
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.

Charalampos SiristatidisAssisted Reproduction Unit, 3rd Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Athens, Athens, Greece.
Theodoros N SergentanisDepartment of Hygiene, Epidemiology and Medical Statistics, University of Athens Medical School, Athens, Greece.
Paraskevi VogiatziAssisted Reproduction Unit, 3rd Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Athens, Athens, Greece.
Prodromos KanavidisDepartment of Hygiene, Epidemiology and Medical Statistics, University of Athens Medical School, Athens, Greece.
Charalampos Chrelias3rd Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Athens, Athens, Greece.
Nikolaos Papantoniou3rd Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, University of Athens, Athens, Greece.
Theodora PsaltopoulouDepartment of Hygiene, Epidemiology and Medical Statistics, University of Athens Medical School, Athens, Greece.

Funding

NIMH NIH HHS R01 MH08632
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo evaluate in vitro maturation (IVM) in sub-fertile women with polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) undergoing in vitro fertilisation (IVF), by comparing outcomes with a control group of non-PCOS. STUDY

designA search strategy was developed for PubMed and studies reporting rates of the following outcomes (live birth; clinical pregnancy; implantation; cycle cancellation; oocyte maturation; oocyte fertilization; miscarriage) between patients with PCOS, PCO and controls undergoing IVM were deemed eligible. The review was conducted in accordance to the PRISMA guidelines and included studies quality was assessed through the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality scale. ORs with their corresponding 95% CIs were calculated for the main analysis and subgroup analyses were performed for PCOS cases vs. controls and PCOS vs. PCO cases. Alternative analyses were performed for live birth and clinical pregnancy, based on cycles and on women. Subgroup analyses for FSH stimulation, hCG priming and type of procedure (IVF/ICSI) were undertaken for all meta-analyses encompassing at least four study arms. Random effects models were used to calculate pooled effect estimates.

resultsEleven studies were identified. A total of 268 PCOS patients (328 cycles), 100 PCO patients (110 cycles) and 440 controls (480 cycles) were included in the meta-analysis. A borderline trend towards higher birth rates among PCOS patients emerged (pooled OR = 1.74, 95%CI: 0.99-3.04) mainly reflected at the subgroup analysis vs. controls. Clinical pregnancy (pooled OR = 2.37, 95%CI: 1.53-3.68) and implantation rates (pooled OR = 1.73, 95%CI: 1.06-2.81) were higher, while cancellation rates lower (pooled OR = 0.18, 95%CI: 0.06-0.47) among PCOS vs. non-PCOS subjects; maturation and miscarriage rates did not differ between groups, while a borderline trend towards lower fertilization rates among PCOS patients was observed.

conclusionThe present meta-analysis provides preliminary evidence on the effectiveness of IVM as a treatment option when offered in sub-fertile PCOS women, as the latter present at least as high outcome rates as those in non-PCOS.

Indexed as

Fertilization in VitroBirth RateFemaleHumansInfertility, FemaleIn Vitro Oocyte Maturation TechniquesOvulation InductionPolycystic Ovary SyndromePregnancyPregnancy Rate

Identifiers

PMID26241855
PMCPMC4524709

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.