Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34553150›Full record

ArticleF&S reports2021

Is there still a role for a cleavage-stage embryo transfer?

Michael F Neblett, Tana Kim, Tiffanny L Jones, Sarah C Baumgarten, Charles C Coddington, Yulian Zhao, Chandra C Shenoy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in F&S reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
12citing papers in PubMed
–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

12 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
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

7 authors.

Michael F NeblettDivision of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Tana KimReproductive Medicine and Infertility Associates, Woodbury, Minnesota.
Tiffanny L JonesConceive Fertility Center, Dallas, Texas.
Sarah C BaumgartenDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Mayo Clinic College of Medicine, Rochester, Minnesota.
Charles C CoddingtonDivision of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Yulian ZhaoDivision of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.
Chandra C ShenoyDivision of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo determine whether pregnancy outcomes are poor or futile when an intended day 5 transfer is converted to a cleavage-stage transfer because of poor embryo development or a lower number of embryos.

designRetrospective cohort study.

settingAcademic medical center. PATIENTS: Women with a limited number of embryos, defined as ≤6 two pronuclear embryos, after in vitro fertilization.

interventionsPatients who had a cleavage-stage transfer were age matched with patients who had a day 5 transfer.

main outcome measuresLive birth rate.

resultsA total of 146 women were included in the study with 73 women in each group. Cleavage-stage transfer was associated with significantly lower implantation and clinical pregnancy rates compared with those of day 5 transfer. Although the live birth rate of the cleavage-stage transfer group was lower than that of the day 5 transfer group (25% vs. 40%, respectively), the cleavage-stage transfer still resulted in a live birth rate of 25%. A subanalysis comparing women who did and did not achieve live birth after cleavage-stage transfer demonstrated a live birth rate of 27% when at least one grade A embryo was transferred vs. 17% when a lesser quality embryo (grade B or C) was transferred.

conclusionsAs expected, the live birth rate after cleavage-stage transfer was lower than that after day 5 transfer. However, the live birth rate of cleavage-stage transfer still fell into acceptable practice, >5%, for patients who were otherwise at very high risk of having no day 5 embryo transfer. Extended culture may not be necessary for all patients.

Indexed as

blastocyst-stage transferCleavage-stage transferembryo transferextended cultureIVFlive birth

Identifiers

PMID34553150
PMCPMC8441559

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.