Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35468159›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2022

Marginal differences in preimplantation morphokinetics between conventional IVF and ICSI in patients with preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A): A sibling oocyte study.

Neelke De Munck, Aşina Bayram, Ibrahim Elkhatib, Andrea Abdala, Ahmed El-Damen, Ana Arnanz, Laura Melado, Barbara Lawrenz, Human Mousavi Fatemi

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03708991 (Effectiveness of PGT-A by Using IVF Versus ICSI for Non-male Factor Infertility), which is not on this map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing 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.

NCT03708991 completednot on this map

Effectiveness of PGT-A by Using IVF Versus ICSI for Non-male Factor Infertility: a Pilot Study

Typeobservational_patient_registrySponsorART Fertility Clinics LLCRan2018 to 2019Enrolled30ConditionsGenetic ConditionArmsIVF combined with PGT-A, ICSI combined with PGT-A
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

8 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. 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

9 authors.

Neelke De MunckART Fertility Clinics, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.ORCID 0000-0001-6404-2638
Aşina BayramART Fertility Clinics, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.
Ibrahim ElkhatibART Fertility Clinics, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.
Andrea AbdalaART Fertility Clinics, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.
Ahmed El-DamenART Fertility Clinics, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.ORCID 0000-0003-4830-425X
Ana ArnanzART Fertility Clinics, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.
Laura MeladoART Fertility Clinics, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.
Barbara LawrenzART Fertility Clinics, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.ORCID 0000-0001-6209-4223
Human Mousavi FatemiART Fertility Clinics, Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThis study aimed to analyze the morphokinetic behaviour between conventional IVF and ICSI, in cycles with preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies (PGT-A). MATERIALS: A randomized controlled trial (NCT03708991) was conducted in a private fertility center. Thirty couples with non-male factor infertility were recruited between November 2018 and April 2019. A total of 568 sibling cumulus oocyte complexes were randomly inseminated with conventional IVF and ICSI and cultured in an Embryoscope time-lapse system. The morphokinetic behaviour of IVF/ICSI sibling oocytes was analysed as primary endpoint. As secondary endpoints, morphokinetic parameters that predict blastocysts that will be biopsied, the day of biopsy, gender and euploid outcome was assessed.

resultsWhen comparing IVF to ICSI, only the time to reach the 2-cell stage (t2) was significantly delayed for IVF embryos: OR: 1.282 [1.020-1.612], p = 0.033. After standardizing for tPNf (ct parameters), only Blast(tStartBlastulation-t2) remained significant: OR: 0.803 [0.648-0.994], p = 0.044. For the analysis of zygotes that will be biopsied on day 5/6 versus zygotes without biopsy, only early morphokinetic parameters were considered. All parameters were different in the multivariate model: ct2: OR: 0.840 [0.709-0.996], p = 0.045; ct6: OR: 0.943 [0.890-0.998], p = 0.043; cc2(t3-t2): OR: 1.148 [1.044-1.263], p = 0.004; cc3(t5-t3): OR: 1.177 [1.107-1.251], p<0.0001. When comparing the development between blastocysts biopsied on day 5 versus day 6, only three morphokinetic parameters were significant: cc2(t3-t2): OR: 1.394 [1.010-1.926], p = 0.044; ctBlastocyst: OR: 0.613 [0.489-0.768], p<0.0001 and ctExpandedBlastocyst: OR: 0.913 [0.868-0.960], p = 0.0004. Multivariate analysis of gender and ploidy did not reveal differences in morphokinetic behaviour.

conclusionMinor morphokinetic differences are observed between IVF and ICSI. Early in the development, distinct cleavage patterns are observed between embryos that will be biopsied or not.

Indexed as

Fertilization in VitroSperm Injections, IntracytoplasmicAneuploidyGenetic TestingHumansOocytes

Identifiers

PMID35468159
PMCPMC9037924

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

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.