Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30074129›Full record

Trial reportJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2018

Testing the efficacy and efficiency of a single "universal warming protocol" for vitrified human embryos: prospective randomized controlled trial and retrospective longitudinal cohort study.

L Parmegiani, K H Beilby, A Arnone, S Bernardi, A M Maccarini, E Nardi, G E Cognigni, M Filicori

Registry-linked trialAbstract 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 NCT06741748 (A Pragmatic, Multi-centre, Double-blinded, Two-arm Randomized Controlled Trial on a Direct Warming Frozen Embryo Transfer in Assisted Reproductive Technologies Treatment Outcome), which is not on this map. Cited by 17 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT06741748 nanot yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2025, after this paper: background citation

A Pragmatic, Multi-centre, Double-blinded, Two-arm Randomized Controlled Trial on a Direct Warming Frozen Embryo Transfer in Assisted Reproductive Technologies Treatment Outcome

TypeinterventionalSponsorChinese University of Hong KongRan2025 to 2027Enrolled578ConditionsFrozen Embryo Transfer (FET), Assisted Reproductive Techniques, In Vitro Fertilization (IVF), Cryopreservation of EmbryosArmsDirect Warming Method, Conventional Multi-step Thawing Method
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

17 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Observational
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Observational
  16. Article
  17. 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

8 authors.

L ParmegianiReproductive Medicine Unit- GynePro Medical Centers GynePro Medical, Via T. Cremona, 8-40137, Bologna, Italy. l.parmegiani@gynepro.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3901-885X
K H BeilbyDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Monash University - Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia.
A ArnoneReproductive Medicine Unit- GynePro Medical Centers GynePro Medical, Via T. Cremona, 8-40137, Bologna, Italy.
S BernardiReproductive Medicine Unit- GynePro Medical Centers GynePro Medical, Via T. Cremona, 8-40137, Bologna, Italy.
A M MaccariniReproductive Medicine Unit- GynePro Medical Centers GynePro Medical, Via T. Cremona, 8-40137, Bologna, Italy.
E NardiDepartment of Medical and Surgical Sciences, University of Bologna, Bologna, Italy.
G E CognigniReproductive Medicine Unit- GynePro Medical Centers GynePro Medical, Via T. Cremona, 8-40137, Bologna, Italy.
M FilicoriReproductive Medicine Unit- GynePro Medical Centers GynePro Medical, Via T. Cremona, 8-40137, Bologna, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo study the efficacy and efficiency of a "universal warming protocol" for vitrified human embryos, based on subsequent steps with 1 and 0.5 M concentration of extracellular cryoprotectant (ECCP).

methodTwo studies on patients undergoing fertility treatments via ICSI: a prospective randomized controlled trial (RCT) and a retrospective cohort study (CS).

settingPrivate assisted reproductive (AR) center. RCT: duration 01/03/2017-01/10/2017; 315 embryos at blastocyst stage obtained from 169 patients. Each patient's embryos were first randomized for vitrification with two different kits: Vitrification Kit (Kitazato, Japan) and Sage Vitrification Kit (Origio, Denmark). The embryos were randomly warmed with either Kitazato (K) or Sage (S) warming kits, specifically: group A (KK), group B (KS), group C (SK), and group D (SS). PRIMARY OUTCOME MEASURE: survival rate (number of embryos surviving per number of embryos warmed). Secondary: implantation rate (number of embryos implanted per number of embryos transferred). CS: duration 01/01/2013-31/12/2015 embryos from patients' own oocytes; 10/04/2015-31/07/2017 embryos from donors' oocytes. A total of 1055 embryos vitrified at cleavage stage obtained from 631 warming cycles: 847 of these obtained from patients' own oocytes, 208 egg-donation-derived embryos. Each patient's embryos were vitrified and warmed in various combinations of three different vitrification/warming kits: Kitazato (K), Sage (S), or made in-house in our laboratory (H). Vitrification/warming kits from different manufacturers are routinely used in our AR center, and the warming procedures are randomly performed with any available kit on a "first-in-first-out" basis, irrespective of the kit used for vitrification. Group names: KK, KS, SK, SS, SH, HK, HS, HH (embryos from patients' own oocytes); eKK, eKS, eSK, eSS (egg-donation-derived embryos).

resultsCryo-survival rates were comparable in all study groups. RCT. Group A 99.0% (96/97), group B 98.8% (83/84), group C 98.4% (61/62), and group D 98.6% (71/72). CS. Embryos from patients' own oocytes: KK 96.4% (54/56), KS 100.0% (13/13), SK 98.8% (80/81), SS 97.2% (174/179), SH 97.6% (40/41), HK 95.2% (20/21), HS 99.5% (187/188), and HH 97.4% (261/268). Egg-donation-derived embryos: eKK 100.0% (91/91), eKS 98.4% (60/61), eSK 100.0% (26/26), and eSS 96.7 (29/30). Implantation was generally comparable in all study groups-exceptions were in CS: KS vs. SK (P = 0.049), SS (P = 0.012), HS (P = 0.010), HH (P = 0.025); and SH vs. SS (P = 0.042), HS (P = 0.035).

conclusionWorldwide, millions of embryos have been cryopreserved using different vitrification kits; these studies establish that it is possible to combine different kits for vitrification and warming using a universal warming protocol. This can optimize costs, simplify lab routines, and favor embryo exchange between IVF centers. RCT REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN12342851.

Indexed as

CryopreservationEmbryo TransferFertilization in VitroAdultBlastocystCohort StudiesDenmarkEmbryo ImplantationFemaleHumansOocytesPregnancyPregnancy RateRetrospective StudiesSperm Injections, IntracytoplasmicVitrificationEmbryo cryopreservationKitazato Vitrification KitSage Vitrification KitUniversal warming procedureVitrificationWarming

Identifiers

PMID30074129
PMCPMC6150888

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.