ArticlePloS one2020
Impact of elective frozen vs. fresh embryo transfer strategies on cumulative live birth: Do deleterious effects still exist in normal & hyper responders?
Article in PloS one, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
12 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Embryonic and neonatal outcomes following double vitrification/thawing: a systematic review and meta-analysis.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Pooled it
- PGT-A: who and when? Α systematic review and network meta-analysis of RCTs.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2021Pooled it
- Efficacy and safety of a one-step warming protocol of vitrified blastocyst stage embryos.F&S reports · 2026Article
- The impact of completely shrunken blastocysts on clinical outcomes in vitrified-warmed single blastocyst transfer cycles.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- FSH/LH co-stimulation in Advanced Maternal Age (AMA) and hypo-responder patients - Arabian gulf delphi consensus group.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2024Article
- The HERA (Hyper-response Risk Assessment) Delphi consensus for the management of hyper-responders in in vitro fertilization.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2023Article
- Assisted Reproductive Technology and Breech Delivery: A Nationwide Cohort Study in Singleton Pregnancies.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Article
- The HERA (Hyper-response Risk Assessment) Delphi consensus definition of hyper-responders for in-vitro fertilization.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2023Article
- Fresh vs. frozen embryo transfer: new approach to minimize the limitations of using national surveillance data for clinical research.Fertility and sterility · 2023Article
- Developmental Potential of embryos does not Impact Pregnancy Outcomes, but it Affects Live Birth Rates in Frozen Blastocyst Transfer Cycles.JBRA assisted reproduction · 2022Article
- Effect of interval between oocyte retrieval and resuscitation embryo transfer on pregnancy outcomes.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Article
- Comparison of Stimulated Cycles with Low Dose r-FSH versus Hormone Replacement Cycles for Endometrial Preparation Prior to Frozen-Thawed Embryo Transfer in Young Women with Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome: A Single-Center Retrospective Cohort Study from China.Drug design, development and therapy · 2021Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIs freeze-all strategy effective in terms of cumulative live birth rates (CLBRs) in all patients?
methodsThis retrospective single-center study analyzed the CLBRs of 2523 patients undergoing fresh or electively frozen blastocyst transfer cycles. In 1047, cycles, the fresh embryo transfer (ET) strategy was applied for the 1st ET, whereas electively frozen ET (e-FET) was performed in 1476 cycles. Female age ≤ 37 and blastocysts frozen via vitrification were included. The patients in each arm were further stratified into four subgroups according to the number of oocytes retrieved as follows: Group A: 1-5, group B: 6-10, group C: 11-15 and group D: 16-25 oocytes retrieved. The primary endpoint was the CLBR. The secondary endpoints were the ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) rate and the live birth rates (LBRs) following fresh ETs and e-FETs for the first transfers. RESULT(S): The CLBR was similar between the fresh ET and e-FET arms in group A (35/76 (46.1%) vs 29/67 (43.3%), p = 0.74) and group B (165/275 (60%) vs 216/324 (66.7%), p = 0.091), whereas significantly higher rates were detected in favor of the e-FET arm within group C (328/460 (71.3%) vs 201/348 (57.8%), p<0.001) and group D (227/348 (65.2%), vs 446/625 (71.5%), p<0.001). The OHSS rate was also found to be higher in the fresh ET arm among group C (12/348 (3.4%) vs 0/460 (0%), p<0.001) and group D (38/348 (10.9%) vs 3/625 (0.5%), p<0.001) patients than e-FET arm. Perinatal and obstetrical outcomes were nonsignificantly different between fresh and e-FET arms. However, the birth weights were significantly lower for fresh ET, 3064 versus 3201 g for singletons (p<0.001).
conclusionCompared with a fresh-transfer strategy, the e-FET strategy resulted in a higher CLBR among patients with >10 oocytes retrieved during stimulated cycles.
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.