Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36456975›Full record

ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2022

A case of discrepancy between three ERA tests in a woman with repeated implantation failure complicated by chronic endometritis.

Kuniaki Ota, Toshifumi Takahashi, Junichiro Mitsui, Kishio Kuroda, Kenichiro Hiraoka, Kiyotaka Kawai

Open access · goldAbstract readCase Reports
In one paragraph

Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
0.8field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Micronutrient Antioxidants for Men (MenevitAntioxidants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. 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

6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Kuniaki OtaFukushima Medical Center for Children and Women, Fukushima Medical University, 1 Hikarigaoka, Fukushima, 960-1295, Japan.
Toshifumi TakahashiFukushima Medical Center for Children and Women, Fukushima Medical University, 1 Hikarigaoka, Fukushima, 960-1295, Japan. totakaha@fmu.ac.jp.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0955-4248
Junichiro MitsuiKameda IVF Clinic Makuhari, Makuhari, 261-8501, Japan.
Kishio KurodaDepartment of Pathology, Nagasaki University, Nagasaki, 852-8501, Japan.
Kenichiro HiraokaKameda IVF Clinic Makuhari, Makuhari, 261-8501, Japan.
Kiyotaka KawaiKameda IVF Clinic Makuhari, Makuhari, 261-8501, Japan.
Fukushima Medical University · JPNagasaki University · JP

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundEndometrial receptivity array (ERA) is used to determine the timing of embryo transfer (ET) synchronized with the window of implantation (WOI). The effectiveness and evaluation of ERAs in women with recurrent implantation failure remain controversial. We report the case of a patient with recurrent implantation failure that raises the issue of reproducibility of ERA tests. CASE REPORT: A 36-year-old Japanese woman with secondary infertility who had previously given birth failed to conceive after three frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) cycles. An ERA test was conducted to confirm the WOI. The first ERA test was performed 125 h after progesterone exposure. The laboratory reported that the endometrium was in a non-receptive (post-receptive) phase, and recommended retesting 101 h after progesterone exposure. A simultaneous chronic endometritis (CE) test showed a score of 3. After the antibiotics administration to treat CE, the second ERA test was performed after 101 h of progesterone exposure. The laboratory reported that the endometrium had not reached the WOI and estimated the WOI to be 113 ± 3 h after progesterone exposure. The third ERA test was performed 113 h after progesterone exposure. The laboratory reported that the endometrium was in a non-receptive (pre-receptive) phase and estimated the WOI to be 137 ± 3 h after progesterone exposure. A CE test performed at the same time as the second and third ERA tests showed a score of 1 for the collected endometrium. According to the third ERA test results, the vitrified-warmed blastocyst was transferred at 137 h of progesterone exposure. Pregnancy was achieved and the patient had an uncomplicated vaginal delivery at 39 weeks. One year later, another pregnancy was achieved after FET at 137 h of progesterone exposure, and the patient delivered at 33 weeks due to an unexpected membrane rupture.

conclusionBecause the results of the ERA test may vary in the presence of CE, CE should be diagnosed simultaneously with or before conducting ERA tests. If CE is diagnosed, ERA testing should be performed after treatment with antimicrobials or other drugs.

Indexed as

EndometritisAdultChronic DiseaseEmbryo ImplantationEndometriumFemaleHumansPregnancyProgesteroneReproducibility of ResultsProgesteroneCD138Chronic endometritisEndometrial receptivity arrayPlasma cell

Identifiers

PMID36456975
PMCPMC9714241
OpenAlexW4311067650

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.