ArticleCureus2021
An Open Prospective Study on Whether Intracytoplasmic Morphologically Selected Sperm Injection (IMSI) Offers a Better Outcome Than Conventional Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection (ICSI).
Article in Cureus, 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.
- Recommendations for Human Sperm Morphology Assessment in 2025: An Expert Review From the French BLEFCO Group.Andrology · 2026Guideline
- IMSI does not improve pregnancy outcomes and live birth rate in severe teratozoospermia patients: a double-blind randomized controlled trial.Scientific reports · 2026Trial
- A narrative review of sperm selection technology for assisted reproduction techniques.Translational andrology and urology · 2024Review
- Emerging trends in sperm selection: enhancing success rates in assisted reproduction.Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective To differentiate the in vitro fertilization (IVF) outcomes between the two procedures, intracytoplasmic morphologically selected sperm injection (IMSI) and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) in terms of relation to chemical pregnancy percentage, clinical pregnancy, live birth, miscarriage, and fertilization rates, respectively. Patients and methods This Open Prospective clinical trial was conducted during the period between Jan 2016 and Dec 2017 at one IVF unit. A total of 446 ICSI cycles and 79 IMSI cycles were conducted. Females were divided into four subgroups according to age. Results The study involved 525 couples (446 first trial ICSI cycles) and (79 first trial IMSI cycles). ICSI was statistically better than the IMSI in relation to the chemical pregnancy, clinical pregnancy (CPR), live birth (LBR), and fertilization rates, respectively (p < 0.05). However, there were no statistically significant differences between the ICSI and IMSI in relation to the miscarriage rate. There were statistically significant differences favoring ICSI in all subgroups except 35-37, in relation to chemical pregnancy; and in the 38-40 and >40 subgroups in relation to CPR. There were no statistically significant differences in these subgroups regarding the live birth, miscarriage, or fertilization rates. Conclusions This study showed that IMSI is not superior to conventional ICSI at the first attempt. Based on the findings in this study, we would not advise couples to choose IMSI at their first treatment attempt.
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.