ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2020
Oocyte cryopreservation in two women with borderline ovarian tumor recurrence.
Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Multidisciplinary, whole-process management of a patient with recurrent serous borderline ovarian tumor from embryo cryopreservation before re-fertility-sparing surgery to successful delivery: a case report.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- Reproductive outcomes in women opting for fertility preservation after fertility-sparing surgery for borderline ovarian tumors.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2024Article
- Successful delivery after in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer in a woman with metachronous primary cancer of ovary and endometrium: a case report.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2023Article
- A patient with a mucinous borderline ovarian tumor after fertility-sparing surgery in whom puncture fluid cytology on oocyte retrieval led to a diagnosis of recurrence.The journal of obstetrics and gynaecology research · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Borderline ovarian tumors (BOTs) commonly occur during reproductive years. Given the good prognosis, fertility-sparing surgery can be considered in young women wishing to preserve their fertility. However, conservative management exposes patients to the risk of recurrence. In these cases, the new surgery may be radical (completing the removal of both adnexa) or, when conservative, it may be associated with relevant damage to the ovarian reserve. In this study, we report on two women who decided to perform ovarian hyper-stimulation and oocyte cryostorage at the time of the diagnosis of recurrence, but before undergoing the new surgery. They both obtained a satisfactory number of oocytes, the retrieval was unremarkable, and no main detrimental effects on the ovarian lesions were noticed. These two cases suggest that ovarian hyper-stimulation and oocyte retrieval before planned surgery for BOT recurrence is a feasible option.
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.