ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2022
Natural cycles achieve better pregnancy outcomes than artificial cycles in non-PCOS women undergoing vitrified single-blastocyst transfer: a retrospective cohort study of 6840 cycles.
Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- Comparison of clinical outcomes and perinatal outcomes between natural cycle and hormone replacement therapy of frozen-thawed embryo transfer in patients with regular menstruation: a propensity score-matched analysis.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2024Article
- Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone agonist (GnRH-a) Pretreatment before Hormone Replacement Therapy Does Not Improve Reproductive Outcomes of Frozen-Thawed Embryo Transfer Cycle in Older Patients with Intrauterine Fibroid: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- "Double Frozen Transfer" Could Influence the Perinatal and Children's Growth: A Nested Case-Control Study of 6705 Live Birth Cycles.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo identify the optimal method for endometrial preparation in vitrified single-blastocyst transfer (VSBT) cycles.
methodsThis was a retrospective cohort study for non-PCOS patients who underwent VSBT cycles from March 2015 to November 2019 in an academic reproductive medical center. A total of 6840 VSBT cycles were enrolled and classified into two groups according to different endometrial preparation methods.
resultsThe non-PCOS patients who underwent VSBT showed a significantly higher clinical pregnancy rate (61.96% vs 56.85%, p < 0.001) and live birth rate (49.09% vs 39.86%, p < 0.001), as well as a statistically lower early miscarriage rate (12.02% vs 18.08%, p < 0.001) in the natural cycle (NC) group compared with the artificial cycle (AC) group. Multivariable analysis further confirmed that NC was associated with an increased likelihood of clinical pregnancy (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 0.852, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.765-0.949, p = 0.004) and live birth (aOR 0.746, 95% CI 0.669-0.832, p < 0 .001), but decreased early miscarriage occurrence (aOR 1.447, 95% CI 1.215-1.724, p < 0.001) compared to AC.
conclusionsOur study demonstrated that non-PCOS patients could benefit from NC in vitrified blastocyst transfer. Increased clinical pregnancy rate and decreased early miscarriage rate led to a significantly higher live birth rate in NC patients compared with AC with our present protocol.
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.