ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2022
Optimal waiting period for frozen embryo transfer after hysteroscopic polypectomy: A propensity score matching analysis.
Article in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Endometrial compaction in patients with chronic endometritis does not predict pregnancy outcomes: a retrospective study.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Article
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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To evaluate the optimal waiting period for frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) after hysteroscopic polypectomy (HSC-P). Design: Retrospective cohort. Setting: University-affiliated hospital. Patients: All patients included in this research underwent hysteroscopy before the first FET cycle after whole embryo freezing. A total of 206 patients had undergone HSC-P, and 3681 patients without endometrial polyps were defined as the controls. Interventions: HSC-P. Main outcome measures: The HSC-P group was divided into three subgroups based on the time interval between HSC-P and the start of an FET cycle. Subgroup 1 consisted of patients who underwent FET after their next menses, subgroup 2 after two menstrual cycles, and subgroup 3 after three or more menstrual cycles. Demographics, baseline Results: There were 137 patients in subgroup 1, 40 in subgroup 2, and 29 in subgroup 3. There were no differences in the baseline characteristics of the three groups. IVF-related data and FET-related data, such as endometrial thickness and ET no. Of embryoes, were similar among the three subgroups. The three subgroups showed no significant differences in implantation rate, biochemical pregnancy rate, abortion rate, clinical pregnancy rate or live birth rate. Besides, There was no significant difference in perinatal outcomes including very preterm delivery, preterm delivery, low birth weight, macrosomia, small for gestational age, large for gestational age, birth weight(g), birth-height(cm)and Apgar Scores. Conclusions: Compared with FET after their next menses, FET after two or more menstrual cycles after HSC-P does not necessarily produce superior outcomes.
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.