ArticleScientific reports2023
General anesthesia with propofol during oocyte retrieval and in vitro fertilization outcomes: retrospective cohort study.
Article in Scientific reports, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- The effective dose of remimazolam in combination with sufentanil for sedation during transvaginal oocyte retrieval: an up-and-down sequential allocation trial.BMC anesthesiology · 2025Trial
- Infusion of propofol with bispectral index monitoring does not reduce the amount of propofol used during transvaginal oocyte retrieval procedure.Scientific reports · 2023Trial
- Article
- Effect of Nitrous Oxide During Oocyte Retrieval on In Vitro Fertilization Outcomes: A Retrospective Study.Cureus · 2025Article
- Anaesthesia for assisted reproductive technologies.BJA education · 2024Review
- The Effect of Sevoflurane and Propofol on the Status of Renal Complications in Traumatic Injury Patients Following Laminectomy Surgery.Bulletin of emergency and trauma · 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
General anesthesia is frequently administered during oocyte retrieval. Its effects on the outcomes of IVF cycles are uncertain. This study investigated whether administration of general anesthesia (specifically propofol) during oocyte retrieval affects IVF outcomes. A total of 245 women undergoing IVF cycles were included in this retrospective cohort study. IVF outcomes of 129 women who underwent oocyte retrieval under propofol anesthesia and 116 without anesthesia were compared. Data were adjusted for age, BMI, estradiol on triggering day and total gonadotropin dose. The primary outcomes were fertilization, pregnancy and live birth rates. A secondary outcome was the efficiency of follicle retrieval associated with the use of anesthesia. Fertilization rate was lower in retrievals under anesthesia compared to without (53.4% ± 34.8 vs. 63.7% ± 33.6, respectively; p = 0.02). There was no significant difference in the ratio of expected to retrieved oocytes between retrievals with and without anesthesia (0.8 ± 0.4 vs. 0.8 ± 0.8, respectively, p = 0.96). The differences in pregnancy and live birth rates between the groups were not statistically significant. General anesthesia administered during oocyte retrieval may have adverse effects on the fertilization potential of oocytes. This impact on the developmental potential of oocytes may lead to negative IVF outcomes and should be investigated further.
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.