Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35197678›Full record

ReviewJournal of human reproductive sciences

Oocyte Cryopreservation - Current Scenario and Future Perspectives: A Narrative Review.

Hrishikesh D Pai, Rashmi Baid, Nandita P Palshetkar, Arnav Pai, Rishma D Pai, Rohan Palshetkar

Open access · diamondAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of human reproductive sciences. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
5.9field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
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

19 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 44 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. International attitudes towards medical and planned oocyte cryopreservation.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2024
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Hrishikesh D PaiDepartment of Reproductive Medicine, Lilavati Hospital and Research Centre, Mumbai, India.
Rashmi BaidDepartment of Reproductive Medicine, Lilavati Hospital and Research Centre, Mumbai, India.
Nandita P PalshetkarDepartment of Reproductive Medicine, Lilavati Hospital and Research Centre, Mumbai, India.
Arnav PaiDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynecology, D Y Patil Medical College and Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Rishma D PaiDepartment of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Lilavati Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Rohan PalshetkarDepartment of Reproductive Medicine, H N Hospital, Mumbai, Maharashtra, India.
Lilavati Hospital & Research Centre · INDr. D. Y. Patil Medical College, Hospital and Research Centre · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Oocyte cryopreservation is a boon for women undergoing assisted reproductive technology. With the evolution in the technique of cryopreservation over the last three decades, there has been an exponential rise in the number of oocyte cryopreservation cycles for diverse indications. Apart from cancer patients, it has also been promoted as a mode of fertility insurance to overcome the age-related decline in fertility as well as post-surgical decline following endometriosis surgery. The objective of the review is to evaluate its clinical applications, ideal age at freezing, optimal oocyte number, freezing method of choice, efficacy, safety and recent advances. In the last decade, vitrification has surpassed slow freezing for oocyte cryopreservation. Although closed system of vitrification provides the aseptic environment, open vitrification is commonly followed in practice. Early to mid-thirties is a reasonable age group for planned oocyte cryopreservation, although it might be recommended at a younger age, in patients with diminished ovarian reserve. The patients should be motivated to preserve around 14-20 mature oocytes for successful live birth. Various studies have shown comparable fertilisation and pregnancy rates between Intracytoplasmic sperm injection with fresh and frozen-thawed oocytes. The available evidence has shown no increase in the incidence of congenital abnormalities in babies born through vitrified oocytes. In the future, image analysis using artificial intelligence, and spindle visualisation using poloscope may further enhance the outcome of oocyte cryopreservation.

Indexed as

Fertility preservationoocyte cryopreservationsocial egg freezing

Identifiers

PMID35197678
PMCPMC8812387
OpenAlexW4200024950

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.