ArticleJournal of ovarian research2022
Short (seven days) versus standard (fourteen days) oestrogen administration in a programmed frozen embryo transfer cycle: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in Journal of ovarian research, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Clinical pregnancy rate for frozen embryo transfer with HRT: a randomized controlled pilot study comparing 1 week versus 2 weeks of oestradiol priming.Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E · 2023Trial
- Optimizing estradiol duration to reduce progesterone-related cancellation in hormone replacement therapy frozen embryo transfer cycles: toward a patient-tailored approach.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
- Preparation of the endometrium for frozen embryo transfer: an update on clinical practices.Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E · 2023Review
- Duration of oestrogen exposure does not affect reproductive outcome in artificial cycles: a retrospective analysis of more than 7000 hormonal replacement therapy cycles for an embryo transfer.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Article
- Finding of the optimal preparation and timing of endometrium in frozen-thawed embryo transfer: a literature review of clinical evidence.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
research questionWhat influence does seven days of oestrogen administration versus fourteen days have on the reproductive outcomes of frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) in programmed endometrial preparation cycles?
designIn a retrospective study, conducted at a university-affiliated tertiary hospital, a total of 2628 infertile patients (4142 FET cycles) were divided into one of two groups between January 2014 and December 2020: group A (n = 1406, seven days of oestrogen before progesterone (P4) supplementation) and group B (n = 2716, fourteen days of oestrogen before P4 supplementation). The primary outcome was cumulative live birth rate (CLBR). Secondary outcomes were other pregnancy-related outcomes, maternal and neonatal complications.
resultsNo significant difference in CLBR was observed when comparing seven versus fourteen days of oestrogen administration before starting P4 supplementation (47.6% vs. 48.8%, P = 0.537). Furthermore, multivariable logistic regression analysis revealed that oestrogen administration in programmed FET cycles (7 days vs. 14 days) was not significantly associated with CLBR (OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.89-1.23). The risks of maternal and neonatal complications were comparable between the two groups.
conclusionsVariation in the duration of oestradiol supplementation before P4 initiation does not impact FET reproductive outcomes. For infertile women who desire to conceive as soon as feasible, short (seven days) oestrogen administration in a programmed FET cycle may be a suitable alternative.
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.