Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35588094›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2022

Cleavage-stage versus blastocyst-stage embryo transfer in assisted reproductive technology.

Demián Glujovsky, Andrea Marta Quinteiro Retamar, Cristian Roberto Alvarez Sedo, Agustín Ciapponi, Simone Cornelisse, Deborah Blake

Open access · greenAbstract readSystematic Review
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 116 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
116citing papers in PubMed, 3 pooled it
32.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% 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

116 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 185 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Trial
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Day 3 embryo quality predicts clinical pregnancy and live birth rates following single frozen-thawed poor-quality blastocyst transfer.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2026
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

56 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Demián GlujovskyReproductive Medicine, CEGYR (Centro de Estudios en Genética y Reproducción), Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Andrea Marta Quinteiro RetamarEggs donation program - Genetics unit, CEGYR (Centro de Estudios en Ginecologia y Reproducción), Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Cristian Roberto Alvarez SedoLaboratory of Reproductive Biology and Genetics, CEGYR, Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Agustín CiapponiArgentine Cochrane Centre, Instituto de Efectividad Clínica y Sanitaria (IECS-CONICET), Buenos Aires, Argentina.
Simone CornelisseDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Radboud University Nijmegen Medical Centre, Nijmegen, Netherlands.
Deborah BlakeRepromed Fertility Specialists, Auckland, New Zealand.
Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas · ARRadboud University Nijmegen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAdvances in embryo culture media have led to a shift in in vitro fertilisation (IVF) practice from cleavage-stage embryo transfer to blastocyst-stage embryo transfer. The rationale for blastocyst-stage transfer is to improve both uterine and embryonic synchronicity and enable self selection of viable embryos, thus resulting in better live birth rates.

objectivesTo determine whether blastocyst-stage (day 5 to 6) embryo transfer improves the live birth rate (LBR) per fresh transfer, and other associated outcomes, compared with cleavage-stage (day 2 to 3) embryo transfer. SEARCH

methodsWe searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register of controlled trials, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL, from inception to October 2021. We also searched registers of ongoing trials and the reference lists of studies retrieved. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) which compared the effectiveness of IVF with blastocyst-stage embryo transfer versus IVF with cleavage-stage embryo transfer. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane. Our primary outcomes were LBR per fresh transfer and cumulative clinical pregnancy rates (cCPR). Secondary outcomes were clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), multiple pregnancy, high-order multiple pregnancy, miscarriage (all following first embryo transfer), failure to transfer embryos, and whether supernumerary embryos were frozen for transfer at a later date (frozen-thawed embryo transfer). We assessed the overall quality of the evidence for the main comparisons using GRADE methods. MAIN

resultsWe included 32 RCTs (5821 couples or women). The live birth rate following fresh transfer was higher in the blastocyst-stage transfer group (odds ratio (OR) 1.27, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.06 to 1.51; I AUTHORS'

conclusionsThere is low-quality evidence for live birth and moderate-quality evidence for clinical pregnancy that fresh blastocyst-stage transfer is associated with higher rates of both than fresh cleavage-stage transfer. We are uncertain whether blastocyst-stage transfer improves the cCPR derived from fresh and frozen-thawed cycles following a single oocyte retrieval. Although there is a benefit favouring blastocyst-stage transfer in fresh cycles, more evidence is needed to know whether the stage of transfer impacts on cumulative live birth and pregnancy rates. Future RCTs should report rates of live birth, cumulative live birth, and miscarriage. They should also evaluate women with a poor prognosis to enable those undergoing assisted reproductive technology (ART) and service providers to make well-informed decisions on the best treatment option available.

Indexed as

Abortion, SpontaneousBlastocystEmbryo TransferFemaleHumansLive BirthPregnancyPregnancy RateReproductive Techniques, Assisted

Identifiers

PMID35588094
PMCPMC9119424
OpenAlexW4280556963

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.