Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37661208›Full record

ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2023

Comparison of 1-year cumulative live birth and perinatal outcomes following single blastocyst transfer with or without preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy: a propensity score-matched study.

Keiichi Kato, Kenji Ezoe, Sachie Onogi, Shiho Ito, Rie Egawa, Naoki Aoyama, Tomoko Kuroda, Akira Kuwahara, Takeshi Iwasa, Toshiyuki Takeshita and 1 more

Open access · greenAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 4 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

11 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Keiichi Kato *Kato Ladies Clinic, Tokyo, Japan. k-kato@towako.net.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1394-4532
Kenji Ezoe *Kato Ladies Clinic, Tokyo, Japan.
Sachie OnogiKato Ladies Clinic, Tokyo, Japan.
Shiho ItoKato Ladies Clinic, Tokyo, Japan.
Rie EgawaKato Ladies Clinic, Tokyo, Japan.
Naoki AoyamaKato Ladies Clinic, Tokyo, Japan.
Tomoko KurodaKato Ladies Clinic, Tokyo, Japan.
Akira KuwaharaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Tokushima University, Tokushima, Japan.
Takeshi IwasaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Tokushima University, Tokushima, Japan.
Toshiyuki TakeshitaTakeshita Ladies Clinic, Tokyo, Japan.
Minoru IraharaDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Tokushima University, Tokushima, Japan.
Tokushima University · JPLadies College · LK

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeWe evaluated whether preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) could increase the cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) in patients with recurrent implantation failure (RIF) and recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL).

methodsThe clinical records of 7,668 patients who underwent oocyte retrieval (OR) with or without PGT-A were reviewed for 365 days and retrospectively analyzed. Using propensity score matching, 579 patients in the PGT-A group were matched one-to-one with 7,089 patients in the non-PGT-A (control) group. Their pregnancy and perinatal outcomes and CLBRs were statistically compared.

resultsThe live birth rate per single vitrified-warmed blastocyst transfers (SVBTs) significantly improved in the PGT-A group in all age groups (P < 0.0002, all). Obstetric and perinatal outcomes were comparable between both groups regarding both RIF and RPL cases. Cox regression analysis demonstrated that in the RIF cases, the risk ratio per OR was significantly lower in the PGT-A group than in the control group (P = 0.0480), particularly in women aged < 40 years (P = 0.0364). However, the ratio was comparable between the groups in RPL cases. The risk ratio per treatment period was improved in the PGT-A group in both RIF and RPL cases only in women aged 40-42 years (P = 0.0234 and P = 0.0084, respectively).

conclusionIncreased CLBR per treatment period was detected only in women aged 40-42 years in both RIF and RPL cases, suggesting that PGT-A is inappropriate to improve CLBR per treatment period in all RIF and RPL cases.

Indexed as

Abortion, HabitualPreimplantation DiagnosisAneuploidyBlastocystEmbryo TransferFemaleFertilization in VitroGenetic TestingHumansLive BirthPregnancyPregnancy RatePropensity ScoreRetrospective StudiesCumulative live birth ratePerinatal outcomePreimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidyPropensity score matchingRecurrent implantation failureRecurrent pregnancy loss

Identifiers

PMID37661208
PMCPMC10643776
OpenAlexW4386407502

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.