ReviewJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2020
ART strategies in Klinefelter syndrome.
Review 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. Cited by 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- Global Practice Patterns and Variations in the Medical and Surgical Management of Non-Obstructive Azoospermia: Results of a World-Wide Survey, Guidelines and Expert Recommendations.The world journal of men's health · 2025Article
- SCAN: a nanopore-based, cost effective decision-supporting tool for mass screening of aneuploidies.Human genomics · 2024Article
- Review
- Individuals with numerical and structural variations of sex chromosomes: interdisciplinary management with focus on fertility potential.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Review
- Clinical outcomes of 77 TESE treatment cycles in non-mosaic Klinefelter syndrome patients.JBRA assisted reproduction · 2022Article
- PGT or ICSI? The impression of NGS-based PGT outcomes in nonmosaic Klinefelter syndrome.Asian journal of andrologyArticle
- Commentary on "PGT or ICSI? The impression of NGS-based PGT outcomes in nonmosaic Klinefelter syndrome".Asian journal of andrologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors at 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposePatients with Klinefelter syndrome (KS) who receive assisted reproductive technology (ART) treatment often experience poor pregnancy rates due to decreased fertilization, cleavage, and implantation rates and even an increased miscarriage rate. Mounting evidence from recent studies has shown that various technological advances and approaches could facilitate the success of ART treatment for KS patients. In this review, we summarize the methods for guiding KS patients during ART and for developing optimal strategies for preserving fertility, improving pregnancy rate and live birth rate, and avoiding the birth of KS infants.
methodsWe searched PubMed and Google Scholar publications related to KS patients on topics of controlled ovarian stimulation protocols, sperm extraction, fertility preservation, gamete artificial activation, round spermatid injection (ROSI), and non-invasive prenatal screening (PGD) methods.
resultsThis review outlines the different ovulation-inducing treatments for female partners according to the individual sperm status in the KS patient. We further summarize the methods of retrieving sperm, storing, and freezing rare sperm. We reviewed different methods of gamete artificial activation and discussed the feasibility of ROSI for sterile KS patients who absolutely lack sperm. The activation of eggs in the process of intracytoplasmic sperm injection and non-invasive PGD are urgently needed to prevent the birth of KS infants.
conclusionThe integrated strategies will pave the way for the establishment of ART treatment approaches and improve the clinical outcome for KS patients.
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.