ArticleIn vitro cellular & developmental biology. Animal2016
Comparison of vitrified outcomes between human early blastocysts and expanded blastocysts.
Article in In vitro cellular & developmental biology. Animal, 2016. 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.
- Effect of different artificial shrinkage methods, when applied before blastocyst vitrification, on perinatal outcomes.Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E · 2017Article
- Impact of Inner Cell Mass Hatching Levels Before Vitrification on Clinical Pregnancy in Preimplantation Genetic Testing for Euploidy Cycles.Reproductive medicine and biologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
We compared the vitrified outcomes between early and expanded blastocysts with or without laser drilling. The grade III embryos from the patients undergoing in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer (IVF-ET) in our reproductive center from September 2009 to February 2015 were incubated into early blastocysts and expanded blastocysts. The early blastocysts and expanded blastocysts were, respectively, divided into laser group (vitrification after laser drilling), non-laser group (direct vitrification), and control group (fresh non-vitrified blastocysts). After thawing, the blastular anabiosis rate, expansion rate, hatching rate, and apoptosis were observed in each group and then were compared amongst groups. This study indicated that the blastular expansion rate (all P < 0.01) and hatching rate (all P < 0.01) were significantly lower, but the blastular apoptosis (all P < 0.05) was significantly higher in both laser and non-laser groups than in the control group in the early blastocysts. In the expanded blastocysts, the blastular anabiosis rate was significantly higher in the laser group than in the non-laser group (P < 0.01), and the blastular expansion rate was significantly higher, but the blastular apoptosis was significantly lower in both laser group and control group than in the non-laser group (all P < 0.05). The blastular expansion rate (all P < 0.01) and hatching rate (all P < 0.01) were significantly higher, but the blastular apoptosis (all P < 0.05) was significantly lower in the expanded laser group than in both early laser and early non-laser groups. We conclude that vitrification for laser-drilling expanded blastocysts can achieve the best outcomes.
Indexed as
Identifiers
26956359What 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.