ArticleJBRA assisted reproduction2017
A prospective study comparing two embryo-transfer soft catheters.
Article in JBRA assisted reproduction, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo compare reproductive outcomes using two different soft catheters i.e. Set TDT® and Cook® Sydney IVF. The primary outcome was defined as a positive β-human chorionic gonadotropin (β-hCG) test.
methodsOur prospective study recruited 68 patients undergoing in vitro fertilization cycles in a private fertility clinic in Porto Alegre, Brazil, between January 2014 and April 2016. They were divided into two groups according to the catheter that would be used for the embryo transfer, and the groups were matched by age. The total number of patients in each group was: 34 for the TDT and 34 for the Cook Sydney. All the patients were submitted to a β-hCG test 12 days after the embryo transfer for pregnancy outcome evaluation.
resultsTen out of 34 patients from the TDT group had a positive outcome for pregnancy, corresponding to 29.4%. The Cook Sydney group had 9 patients out of 34 with positive outcomes, corresponding to 26.5%. Comparing the efficacy of both catheters for the primary outcome, there was no significant difference (p>0.05) between the TDT and the Cook Sydney catheters.
conclusionThe TDT and the Cook Sydney catheters efficacies were similar for embryo transfer during assisted reproductive technology cycles.
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.