SynthesisJBRA assisted reproduction2018
Physiological ICSI (PICSI) vs. Conventional ICSI in Couples with Male Factor: A Systematic Review.
Synthesis in JBRA assisted reproduction, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 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
13 citing papers in PubMed.
- Trial
- Physiological, hyaluronan-selected intracytoplasmic sperm injection for infertility treatment (HABSelect): a parallel, two-group, randomised trial.Lancet (London, England) · 2019Trial
- Sperm DNA fragmentation and its influence on mammalian reproduction.Nature reviews. Urology · 2026Review
- Mapping the Scientometric Landscape of Andrology: Trends, Gaps, and Future Directions in Male Reproductive Health: A Scoping Review.The world journal of men's health · 2026Article
- Automated AI for real-time sperm selection in ICSI: reducing variability and studying the role of sperm in embryo development.Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E · 2025Observational
- A Comprehensive Comparison of PICSI and ICSI Techniques Through a Triple-Blinded Trial: Effects on Embryo Quality, Cumulative Pregnancy Rate, and Live Birth Rate.Biomedicines · 2025Article
- Article
- Controversy and Consensus on the Management of Elevated Sperm DNA Fragmentation in Male Infertility: A Global Survey, Current Guidelines, and Expert Recommendations.The world journal of men's health · 2023Article
- Stain-Free Sperm Analysis and Selection for Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection Complying with WHO Strict Normal Criteria.Biomedicines · 2023Article
- Influence of a hyaluronan-binding system for sperm selection in intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles on embryo morphokinetic parameters and in vitro fertilization cycle outcomes.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2023Article
- What Does Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection Change in Embryonic Development? The Spermatozoon Contribution.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Review
- PICSI vs. MACS for abnormal sperm DNA fragmentation ICSI cases: a prospective randomized trial.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2020Article
- Does Physiological Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection Improve Outcome in Men with Abnormal Semen Parameters: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of human reproductive sciencesArticle
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesTo determine the efficacy of the physiological ICSI technique (PICSI) vs. conventional ICSI in the prognosis of couples, with respect to the following outcome measures: live births, clinical pregnancy, implantation, embryo quality, fertilization and miscarriage rates.
methodsA systematic review of the literature, extracting raw data and performing data analysis. Patient(s): Couples with the male factor, who were subjected to in-vitro fertilization. Main Outcome Measures: rates of live births, clinical pregnancy, implantation, embryo quality, fertilization and miscarriage.
resultsIn the systematic search, we found 2,918 studies and an additional study from other sources; only two studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria for this systematic review. The rates of live births, clinical pregnancy, implantation, embryo quality, fertilization and miscarriage were similar for both groups.
conclusionThere is no statistically significant difference between PICSI vs. ICSI, for any of the outcomes analyzed in this study. Enough information is still not available to prove the efficacy of the PICSI technique over ICSI in couples with male factor.
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.