ArticleScientific reports2021
Blastocyst cryopreservation and cryopreservation-warming transfer is an effective embryo transfer strategy for day 1 rescue intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles.
Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Should rescue ICSI be re-evaluated considering the deferred transfer of cryopreserved embryos in in-vitro fertilization cycles? A systematic review and meta-analysis.Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E · 2021Pooled it
- Obstetrical and neonatal outcomes after vitrified-warmed blastocyst transfer in day 1 rescue intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles: a retrospective cohort study.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2024Article
- Clinical outcome of different embryo transfer strategies after late rescue ICSI procedure: a 10-year total fertilisation failure cohort study.BMC pregnancy and childbirth · 2023Article
- Biomolecular Pathways of Cryoinjuries in Low-Temperature Storage for Mammalian Specimens.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
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
This was a retrospective analysis of a total of 625 r-ICSI cycles using freeze-all-embryos and embryo transfers (ET) in subsequent cryopreservation-warming cycles to determine the effect of the ET method for day 1 rescue intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles (r-ICSI). Two methods were used: in method 1, cleavage-stage embryos were frozen and were directly transferred in a subsequent cryopreservation-warming cycle (r-ICSI frozen cleavage), and 144 cleavage-stage ETs occurred. Similarly, in method 2, there were 188 blastocyst-stage ETs (r-ICSI frozen blast) performed. The live birth rate (LBR) for r-ICSI frozen blast was better than that for r-ICSI frozen cleavage in calculation of ET cycles (19.44% vs. 37.77%) and also remained better after the use of logistic regression analysis (OR = 2.721, 95% CI 1.604-4.616). Conservative cumulative LBR were compared between r-ICSI frozen cleavage and r-ICSI frozen blast with regard to oocyte retrieval cycles (17.39% vs. 15.30%). The same results were obtained for conservative cumulative LBR after logistic regression analysis (OR = 0.925, 95% CI 0.557-1.535). The results of this study confirmed that it was valuable to perform r-ICSI if using freeze-all-embryos. Further, r-ICSI embryos were cultured to blastocyst stage, cryopreserved, and used in subsequent cryopreservation-warming cycles, which was an effective embryo transfer strategy and obtained satisfactory results.
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.