ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2022
Impact of cell loss after warming of human vitrified day 3 embryos on obstetric outcome in single frozen embryo transfers.
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.
- Frozen versus fresh embryo transfer in women with low prognosis for in vitro fertilisation treatment: pragmatic, multicentre, randomised controlled trial.BMJ (Clinical research ed.) · 2025Trial
- Insights gained from a cleavage-stage embryo freeze-all policy in in vitro maturation cycles.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2025Article
- Two-year cumulative live-birth rates and maximum number of transfer cycles in women aged ≥ 40 years.Scientific reports · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeDoes cell loss (CL) after vitrification and warming (V/W) of day 3 embryos have an impact on live birth rate (LBR) and neonatal outcomes?
methodThis retrospective analysis includes cleavage stage day 3 embryos vitrified/warmed between 2011 and 2018. Only single vitrified/warmed embryo transfers were included. Pre-implantation genetic screening, oocyte donation, and age banking were excluded from the analysis. The sample was divided into two groups: group A (intact embryo after warming) and group B (≤ 50% blastomere loss after warming).
resultsOn the total embryos (n = 2327), 1953 were fully intact (83.9%, group A) and 374 presented cell damage (16.1%, group B). In group B, 62% (232/374) of the embryos had lost only one cell. Age at cryopreservation, cause of infertility, insemination procedure, and semen origin were comparable between the two groups. The positive hCG rate (30% and 24.3%, respectively, for intact vs CL group, p = 0.028) and LBR (13.7% and 9.4%, respectively, for intact vs CL group, p = 0.023) per warming cycle were significantly higher for intact embryos. However, LBR per positive hCG was equivalent between intact and damaged embryos (45.6% vs 38.5%, respectively, p = 0.2). Newborn measurements (length, weight, and head circumference at birth) were comparable between the two groups. Multivariate logistic regression showed that the presence of CL is not predictive for LB when adjusting for patients' age.
conclusionsLBR is significantly higher after transfer of an intact embryo compared to an embryo with CL after warming; however, neonatal outcomes are comparable between the two groups.
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.