ArticleChinese medical journal2019
Optimal waiting period for fresh embryo transfer after hysteroscopic adhesiolysis: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in Chinese medical journal, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
8 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Optimal timing to transfer embryos for women who underwent hysteroscopy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Pooled it
- Development of a one-step office hysteroscopic lightweight artificial intelligence application for subfertility risk stratification of intrauterine adhesions.Fundamental research · 2026Article
- Prognostic Factors and Predictive Models for Reproductive Outcomes in Patients with Intrauterine Adhesions: A Review.International journal of women's health · 2026Review
- Visualized hysteroscopic artificial intelligence fertility assessment system for endometrial injury: an image-deep-learning study.Annals of medicine · 2025Article
- Comparison of Secondary Prevention Following Hysteroscopic Adhesiolysis in the Improvement of Reproductive Outcomes: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- In vitro fertilization and embryo transfer may improve live birth rate for patients with intrauterine adhesions after hysteroscopic adhesiolysis.Zhong nan da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Central South University. Medical sciences · 2022Article
- Hysteroscopic metroplasty for the treatment of the dysmorphic uterus: A SWOT analysis.Frontiers in surgery · 2022Review
- Pregnancy Patterns Impact Live Birth Rate for Patients With Intrauterine Adhesions After Hysteroscopic Adhesiolysis: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Frontiers in physiology · 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 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundVery few studies have been conducted regarding the optimal time interval between hysteroscopic adhesiolysis and the embryo transfer (ET). Investigation of this optimal time may be helpful for assisted reproductive technology. Therefore, we investigated effects of the interval between hysteroscopic adhesiolysis and ET upon in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycle outcomes.
methodsPatients were recruited between January 2014 and September 2017 at the Reproductive Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University. Patients who were diagnosed with intra-uterine adhesion (IUA) and underwent hysteroscopic adhesiolysis before fresh IVF-ET or intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection cycles were classified into three groups according to the interval between hysteroscopic adhesiolysis and ET: less than 90 days (Group 1), 90 to 180 days (Group 2), and greater than 180 days (Group 3). Baseline characteristics, controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) response, and pregnancy outcomes after ET were compared. Analysis of variance or non-parametric tests were used to test numerical data. The Pearson's Chi-squared test was used to test categorical data.
resultsA total of 312 patients were recruited as follows: 112 in Group 1, 137 in Group 2, and 63 in Group 3. There were no differences in baseline and COS characteristics among the three groups. The live-birth rate in Group 2 (40.1%) was significantly higher than that in Group 1 (17.9%; χ = 14.545, P < 0.001). There were no significant differences in the rates of biochemical, ongoing, and clinical pregnancy, and biochemical and clinical pregnancy abortion, as well as stillbirth among the groups. In the mild IUA patients, the live-birth rate was significantly higher in Group 2 (42.6%) compared with Group 1 (22%; χ = 8.413, P = 0.004). In the moderate IUA patients, Group 2 (35.7%) had a higher frequency of live births than Group 1 (6.7%; χ = 8.187, P = 0.004).
conclusionsThe optimal waiting period for fresh ET after hysteroscopic adhesiolysis was 90 to 180 days in the current study.
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.