Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34521412›Full record

SynthesisReproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E2021

Sequential cleavage and blastocyst embryo transfer and IVF outcomes: a systematic review.

Jianeng Zhang, Chong Wang, Huanhuan Zhang, Yan Zhou

Abstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Effect of sequential embryo transfer onFrontiers in medicine · 2023
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Jianeng ZhangReproductive Endocrinology Center, Hangzhou Women's Hospital (Hangzhou Maternity and Child Health Care Hospital), Hangzhou, 310000, China.
Chong WangReproductive Endocrinology Center, Hangzhou Women's Hospital (Hangzhou Maternity and Child Health Care Hospital), Hangzhou, 310000, China. 13906525803@163.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-6217-7771
Huanhuan ZhangReproductive Endocrinology Center, Hangzhou Women's Hospital (Hangzhou Maternity and Child Health Care Hospital), Hangzhou, 310000, China.
Yan ZhouReproductive Endocrinology Center, Hangzhou Women's Hospital (Hangzhou Maternity and Child Health Care Hospital), Hangzhou, 310000, China.

Funding

natural science foundation of zhejiang province LQ18H040009
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundSequential embryo transfer has been proposed as a way to improve embryo implantation in women for in vitro fertilization (IVF), but the effect on pregnancy outcomes remains ambiguous. This systematic review was conducted to investigate the efficacy of sequential embryo transfer on IVF outcomes.

methodsA literature search was performed in the PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, ScienceDirect and Wanfang databases. Data were pooled using a random- or fixed-effects model according to study heterogeneity. The results are expressed as relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was evaluated by the I

resultsTen eligible studies with 2658 participants compared sequential embryo transfer and cleavage transfer, while four studies with 513 participants compared sequential embryo transfer and blastocyst transfer. The synthesis results showed that the clinical pregnancy rate was higher in the sequential embryo transfer group than in the cleavage embryo transfer group (RR 1.42, 95% CI 1.26-1.60, P< 0.01) for both women who did experience repeated implantation failure (RIF) (RR 1.58, 95% CI 1.17-2.13, P< 0.01) and did not experience RIF (Non-RIF) (RR 1.44, 95% CI 1.20-1.66, P< 0.01). However, sequential embryo transfer showed no significant benefit over blastocyst embryo transfer.

conclusionThe current systematic review demonstrates that sequential cleavage and blastocyst embryo transfer improve the clinical pregnancy rate over conventional cleavage embryo transfer. For women with adequate embryos, sequential transfer could be attempted following careful consideration. More high-grade evidence from prospective randomized studies is warranted.

Indexed as

BlastocystCleavage Stage, OvumEmbryo, MammalianEmbryo TransferFemaleFertilization in VitroHumansInfertilityPregnancyPregnancy OutcomePregnancy RateTreatment OutcomeBlastocyst embryo transferCleavage embryo transferIn vitro fertilizationSequential embryo transferSystematic review

Identifiers

PMID34521412
PMCPMC8439041

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.