ArticleMedical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research2018
Retrospective Study to Compare Frozen-Thawed Embryo Transfer with Fresh Embryo Transfer on Pregnancy Outcome Following Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection for Male Infertility.
Article in Medical science monitor : international medical journal of experimental and clinical research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 16 citations in OpenAlex.
- Differential Effects of Assisted Reproduction Technology on Placental Epigenetics and Angiogenesis: Insights from Fresh, Frozen, and Egg Donation Pregnancies.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- The future of embryo engineering and fertility research in interdisciplinary collaboration.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2025Review
- Clinical outcomes of fresh and frozen embryos transfer afterZhejiang da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Zhejiang University. Medical sciences · 2024Article
- Effect of Superovulation Treatment on Oocyte's DNA Methylation.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
- Predicting clinical pregnancy using clinical features and machine learning algorithms in in vitro fertilization.PloS one · 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
9 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
BACKGROUND With the development of assisted reproductive technology, there is increasing evidence that frozen-thawed (FT) embryo transfer achieves a better outcome when compared with fresh embryo transfer in different types of infertile individuals. This aim of this study was to investigate the effect of FT embryo transfer for intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) on pregnancy outcome in assisted reproductive technology for male infertility. MATERIAL AND METHODS A total of 516 embryo transfer cycles (286 fresh embryo transfer cycles and 230 FT embryo transfer cycles) were studied, in which ICSI treatment was performed for the first time because of male infertility. The women in the study were normal or had Fallopian tube abnormalities. The clinical data and pregnancy outcomes of these two study groups were compared. RESULTS The implantation rate, pregnancy rate, and multiple birth rate of the FT embryo transfer group were similar when compared with the fresh embryo transfer group. The live birth rate of the FT embryo transfer group was significantly greater when compared with the fresh embryo transfer group (P<0.05). The rate of miscarriage of the FT embryo transfer group was 6.52%, which was significantly less than that of the fresh embryo transfer group (14.01%) (P<0.05). The gestational age and neonatal birth weight were not significantly different between the two groups (P>0.05). CONCLUSIONS FT embryo transfer was an effective and safe treatment for patients undergoing ICSI, which improved the live birth rate and reduced the rate of miscarriage.
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.