ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2020
The live birth and neonatal outcomes in the subsequent pregnancy among patients with adverse pregnancy outcomes in first frozen embryo transfer cycles.
Article in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- The predictive value of fresh embryo transfer pregnancy results on frozen embryo transfer outcomes: a cohort study.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
- "Try until the last?"-the relevance of fresh embryo transfer outcomes for subsequent same-cohort vitrified-warmed cycles.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2024Article
- Cumulative live birth rates for low-prognosis women over 5 years or 9 frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeTo explore whether the adverse pregnancy outcomes in first frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles affect live birth and neonatal outcomes in the subsequent pregnancy?
methodsThis was a retrospective study. Women with a history of adverse pregnancy outcomes in first FET cycles started their subsequent embryo transfer cycles. The adverse pregnancy outcomes included biochemical pregnancy, ectopic pregnancy, and first-trimester pregnancy loss. The main outcomes of present study were live birth rate and neonatal outcomes.
resultsResults showed patients with first-trimester pregnancy loss in first FET cycles had a 95 percent greater chance of live birth in subsequent FET cycles (OR 1.95, 95% CI 1.33-2.88). However, the biochemical pregnancy/ectopic pregnancy in initial FET cycles did not affect the chance of live birth in second cycles (biochemical pregnancy: OR 1.21, 95% CI 0.82-1.77; ectopic pregnancy: OR 1.06, 95% CI 0.55-2.05). The neonatal outcomes of singletons were not affected by the number of embryo transfer cycles.
conclusionsPatients with first-trimester pregnancy loss in first FET cycle had a greater chance of live birth in second FET cycles, but the biochemical pregnancy/ectopic pregnancy in first FET cycles did not significantly affect the live birth in second FET cycles. The three types of adverse pregnancy outcomes in first FET cycles did not affect neonatal outcomes in the second cycles.
Indexed as
Identifiers
32468163What 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.