Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29168022›Full record

Trial reportJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2018

No advantage of fresh blastocyst versus cleavage stage embryo transfer in women under the age of 39: a randomized controlled study.

Paolo Emanuele Levi-Setti, Federico Cirillo, Antonella Smeraldi, Emanuela Morenghi, Giulia E G Mulazzani, Elena Albani

Registry-linked trialOpen access · greenAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT02639000 (Effects of Blastocyst Stage Embryo Transfer Compared With Cleavage Stage Embryo Transfer in Women ≤ 38 Years), which is not on this map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.7field-weighted citation impact, top 14% of its field
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.

NCT02639000 nacompletednot on this map

Effects of Blastocyst Stage Embryo Transfer Compared With Cleavage Stage Embryo Transfer in Women ≤ 38 Years

TypeinterventionalSponsorIstituto Clinico HumanitasRan2010 to 2016Enrolled388ConditionsInfertilityArmsEmbryo transfer
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Congenital anomaly and perinatal outcome following blastocyst- vs cleavage-stage embryo transfer: systematic review and network meta-analysis.Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology : the official journal of the International Society of Ultrasound in Obstetrics and Gynecology · 2023
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Observational
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Blastocyst versus cleavage transfers: who benefits?Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2022
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Comparison of Pregnancy Outcomes Between Single-Morula Embryo Transfer and Single-Blastocyst Transfer in Fresh IVF/ICSI Cycles.Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research · 2021
    Article
  17. Article
  18. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Paolo Emanuele Levi-SettiHumanitas Fertility Center, Department of Gynaecology, Division of Gynaecology and Reproductive Medicine, Humanitas Research Hospital, 20084, Rozzano, Milan, Italy. paolo.levi_setti@humanitas.it.
Federico CirilloHumanitas Fertility Center, Department of Gynaecology, Division of Gynaecology and Reproductive Medicine, Humanitas Research Hospital, 20084, Rozzano, Milan, Italy.
Antonella SmeraldiHumanitas Fertility Center, Department of Gynaecology, Division of Gynaecology and Reproductive Medicine, Humanitas Research Hospital, 20084, Rozzano, Milan, Italy.
Emanuela MorenghiBiostatistics Unit, Humanitas Research Hospital, Rozzano, Milan, Italy.
Giulia E G MulazzaniHumanitas University, Rozzano, Milan, Italy.
Elena AlbaniHumanitas Fertility Center, Department of Gynaecology, Division of Gynaecology and Reproductive Medicine, Humanitas Research Hospital, 20084, Rozzano, Milan, Italy.
Humanitas University · ITIRCCS Humanitas Research Hospital · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeIs there a difference in implantation and pregnancy rates between embryos transferred electively at cleavage or blastocyst stage in infertile women ≤ 38 years with at least four zygotes on day 1 post retrieval?

methodsA randomized clinical trial was conducted in a single tertiary care hospital with a sample size of 194 patients in each arm for a total population of 388 women. Patients less than 39 years of age with more than three fertilized oocytes and less than four previous assisted reproductive technology (ART) attempts were inclusion criteria.

resultsThe two groups were similar for age, years of infertility, indication to treatment, basal antimüllerian hormone and FSH, number of previous ART cycles, primary or secondary infertility, type of induction protocol, days of stimulation, total gonadotrophin dose, and estradiol (E2) and progesterone (P) levels at trigger. No statistically significant differences were found in terms of number of retrieved oocytes, inseminated oocytes, fertilization rate, canceled transfers (7.73% in blastocyst and 3.61% in cleavage stage group), and cycles with frozen embryos and/or oocytes. Although a higher number of fertilized oocytes were in the blastocyst stage group (6.18 ± 1.46 vs 5.89 ± 1.54, p = 0.052), a statistically greater number of embryos/randomized cycle were transferred at cleavage stage (1.93 ± 0.371) compared with the number of transferred blastocysts (1.80 ± 0.56), probably due to the number of embryos not reaching blastocyst stage (3.09%). The implantation rate (28.37 vs 25.67%), pregnancy rate per cycle (36.06 vs38.66%), transfer (39.66 vs 40.11%), spontaneous abortions (19.72% vs 12.00%), delivery rate per cycle (27.84 vs 32.99%), and transfer (30.17 vs 34.22%) were not significantly different between the blastocyst and cleavage stage groups. The twin delivery rate was higher in the blastocyst stage group, although not significant (42.59 vs 28.12%). The mean numbers of frozen blastocyst (2.30 ± 1.40 vs 2.02 ± 1.00) and frozen oocytes (7.09 ± 3.55vs 6.79 ± 3.26) were not significantly different between the two groups.

conclusionsFresh blastocyst-stage transfer versus cleavage-stage transfer did not show any significant difference in terms of implantation and pregnancy rate in this selected group of patients. A high twin delivery rate in both groups (35.59%) was registered, and although not significant, they were higher in the blastocyst transfer group (42.59 vs 28.12%). Our conclusion supports considering single embryo transfer (SET) policy, even in cleavage stage in patients younger than 39 years with at least four zygotes.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov registration number NCT02639000.

Indexed as

AdultBlastocystEmbryo ImplantationEmbryo TransferFemaleFertilization in VitroHumansInfant, NewbornInfertility, FemaleMaleOocyte RetrievalPregnancyPregnancy, MultiplePregnancy OutcomePregnancy RateSingle Embryo TransferBlastocyst stageCleavage stageCost-effectivenessIVF/ICSIPrediction models

Identifiers

PMID29168022
PMCPMC5904063
OpenAlexW2769157689

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.