ArticleTurkish journal of obstetrics and gynecology2018
Natural cycle versus artificial cycle in frozen-thawed embryo transfer: A randomized prospective trial.
Article in Turkish journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03954587 (What is the Optimal Cycle Regimen for Frozen- Thawed Embryo Transfer Cycles), which is not on this map. Cited by 28 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
What is the Optimal Cycle Regimen for Frozen- Thawed Embryo Transfer Cycles: Spontaneous Natural Cycles Versus Hormonal Replacement Treatment (HRT) Cycles
Who cites it
28 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 51 citations in OpenAlex.
- Pooled it
- Cycle regimens for endometrial preparation prior to frozen embryo transfer.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2025Pooled it
- The optimal route of progesterone administration for luteal phase support in a frozen embryo transfer: a systematic review.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2023Pooled it
- Preparation of the Endometrium for Frozen Embryo Transfer: A Systematic Review.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2021Pooled it
- Endometrial preparation for women undergoing embryo transfer with frozen embryos or embryos derived from donor oocytes.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2020Pooled it
- Progesterone-induced endometrial thickness changes do not affect singleton neonatal outcomes in frozen embryo transfer: a retrospective analysis of 6,331 newborns.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2026Article
- Evaluating the role of GnRH agonists in frozen embryo transfer cycles among polycystic ovary syndrome patients: a randomized clinical trial.Annals of medicine and surgery (2012) · 2026Article
- Efficacy of Daily 50 mg Intramuscular Progesterone for Luteal Phase Support in Frozen Embryo Transfer Cycles: Analysis of Serum Levels and Pregnancy Outcomes.Journal of family & reproductive health · 2025Article
- Comparison of clinical pregnancy rates between hormone replacement therapy and modified natural cycle for endometrial preparation in frozen embryo transfer cycles: An RCT.International journal of reproductive biomedicine · 2025Article
- Efficacy of modified natural cycle vs. hormone replacement therapy in oocyte donation for recipients of advanced maternal age: a retrospective study.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2025Observational
- Clinical outcomes of different 17β-estradiol drug regimens and their impact on endometrial receptivity.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Article
- Association of GnRH Agonist Pretreatment with Reproductive Outcomes in Women ≥35 years with Diminished Ovarian Reserve Undergoing Frozen Embryo Transfer: A Large Retrospective Cohort Study.International journal of women's health · 2025Article
- Effectiveness, safety, and practicality of intramuscular progesterone in restoring pregnancy outcomes during frozen embryo transfers.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Article
- Does hCG-trigger in the mild stimulation protocol for endometrial preparation have any effect on pregnancy outcome in frozen-thawed embryo transfer?Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E · 2024Article
- Comparison of clinical outcomes and perinatal outcomes between natural cycle and hormone replacement therapy of frozen-thawed embryo transfer in patients with regular menstruation: a propensity score-matched analysis.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2024Article
- Patient- and cycle-specific factors affecting the outcome of frozen-thawed embryo transfers.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2023Article
- Review of Endometrial Receptivity Array: A Personalized Approach to Embryo Transfer and Its Clinical Applications.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Review
- Natural cycle frozen embryo transfer: a survey of current assisted reproductive technology practices in the U.S.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2023Article
- Influencing factors and predictive model of live birth involving low-grade blastocyst frozen-thawed transfer: a retrospective study.European journal of medical research · 2023Article
- Endometrial preparation methods prior to frozen embryo transfer: A retrospective cohort study comparing true natural cycle, modified natural cycle and artificial cycle.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo investigate whether there was a difference in pregnancy outcomes between modified natural cycle frozen-thawed embryo transfer (NC-FET) cycles and artificial cycles (AC)-FET in women who all had regular menstrual cycles. MATERIALS AND
methodsOne hundred seventy patients who met the inclusion criteria and had at least two cryopreserved embryos were included in a prospective randomized controlled trial. Eighty-five patients were randomized based on Bernoulli distribution into the following two groups: 1) Modified NC-FET using human chorionic gonadotropin for ovulation induction and 2) AC-FET, in which endometrial timing was programmed with estrogen and progesterone. The main studied outcome measure was the clinical pregnancy rate per cycle.
resultsNo significant differences were found between the two groups with regard to the chemical, clinical, and ongoing pregnancy rates (48.2% vs 45.9%, p>0.05; 38.9% vs 35.3%, p>0.05; and 37.6% vs 34.1%, p>0.05, respectively), as well as the live birth or miscarriage rates per cycle (35.3% vs 31.8%, p>0.05; and 1.2% vs 1.2%, p>0.05, respectively).
conclusionThese findings suggest that although both FET protocols are equally effective in terms of pregnancy outcomes in women with regular menstrual cycles, NC-FET is more favorable because it requires no medication, has no adverse events, and has a significant cost reduction.
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.