ArticleJournal of human reproductive sciences
Are we Justified Doing Routine Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection in Nonmale Factor Infertility? A Retrospective Study Comparing Reproductive Outcomes between
Article in Journal of human reproductive sciences. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- The effect of ICSI in infertility couples with non-male factor: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2020Pooled it
- Intracytoplasmic sperm injection versus conventional in vitro fertilization in unexplained infertility.F&S reports · 2024Article
- Reproductive Outcomes of Conventional In Vitro Fertilization and Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection in Patients with Non-Severe Male Infertility Across Poor and Different Sub-Optimal Ovarian Response Categories: A Cohort Study Based on 30,352 Fresh Cycles from 2009-2019.Reproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.) · 2024Article
- The influence of day 3 embryo cell number on the clinical pregnancy and live birth rates of day 5 single blastocyst transfer from frozen embryo transfer cycles.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2022Article
- Impact of intracytoplasmic sperm injection in women with non-male factor infertility: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2022Review
- The Impact of Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection in Non-Male Factor Infertility-A Critical Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Review
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
introductionIntracytoplasmic sperm insemination (ICSI) came into use in 1992 to improve fertilization in couples with male factor infertility undergoing
methodsThis is a retrospective single centre study undertaken at a private IVF center. A total of 350 patients with normal male factor were included in the study of which 186 underwent conventional IVF and 134 were subjected to ICSI. They were then compared for various reproductive parameters with Live Birth Rate (LBR) being the primary outcome.
resultsFertilization rates (89.99% vs 85.1%), Blastocyst formation rates (62.86% vs 50.61%) and clinical pregnancy rates (37.85% vs 32.35%) were found to be higher in the IVF group compared to the ICSI group though not statistically significant. The live birth rates in the IVF group was also higher than the ICSI group (32.71% vs 24.26%).
conclusionIVF edged over ICSI in all aspects resulting in better clinical outcome with higher take home babies in non-male factor infertility. Our results show that routine ICSI should not be used as a blanket therapy for all cases in ART.
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.