Trial reportJBRA assisted reproduction2021
Comparing sequential vs day 3 vs day 5 embryo transfers in cases with recurrent implantation failure: randomized controlled trial.
Trial report in JBRA assisted reproduction, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It has been retracted, and should not be counted. 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, 13 citations in OpenAlex.
- Live birth rate and perinatal outcomes following sequential embryo transfer in women with recurrent implantation failure undergoing frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2025Article
- Effect of sequential cleavage and blastocyst embryo transfer compared to single cleavage stage embryo transfer on assisted reproductive technology outcome: An RCT.International journal of reproductive biomedicine · 2024Article
- Sequential embryo transfer versus double cleavage-stage embryo or double blastocyst transfer in patients with recurrent implantation failure with frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles: a cohort study.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
- Retraction · 2023-01-01Concerns/Issues about Data · Investigation by Journal/Publisher · Investigation by Third Party · Unreliable Results and/or Conclusions ·
- Retracted
Authors and funding
7 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThe recent improvement in sequential media has refocused its attention on the role of human blastocysts in ART, not only because of its advantages but also because of the possible cancellation of embryo transfer when relying on blastocyst transfer only. Hence, the idea of sequential transfer on day 3 and day 5 was proposed. Objective: To compare the pregnancy outcomes of sequential embryo transfer on day 3 and day 5, versus cleavage transfer on day 3 and blastocyst transfer on day 5 in cases of recurrent implantation failure.
methodsThis was a prospective and randomized trial, in which 210 qualified patients with recurrent implantation failures undergoing IVF/ICSI were randomized into three groups, each group included 70 patients. Embryo transfer was performed in day 3 in the first group, day 5 (blastocyst transfer) in the second group and sequential embryo transfer in days 3 and 5 in the third group. We assessed pregnancy outcomes from all the three groups. Results: Clinical pregnancy and live birth rates were significantly higher in the sequential group than either group day-3 or day-5 of embryo transfer in cases with recurrent implantation failures.
conclusionsSequential embryo transfer in cases with recurrent implantation failures and adequate number of retrieved oocytes is associated with higher implantation and clinical pregnancy rates, and it is advocated for patients having an adequate number of good quality embryos.
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.