ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2023
Examining reasons that patients discard cryopreserved oocytes.
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. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeAssess the rate, rationale, and characteristics of patients who cryopreserved and subsequently discarded their oocytes, and compare their characteristics to patients with continued cryopreservation of oocytes.
methodsAll patients who disposed of cryopreserved oocytes between 2009 and 2022 reported their reason for discarding their oocytes. This was a retrospective cohort study.
resultsOf 5,010 patients who underwent oocyte cryopreservation (OC) cycles, 201 (4%) patients elected to discard their oocytes and 751 (15%) thawed oocytes for clinical use. The average ages of OC and disposal were 35 and 39 years old, respectively. Of the 201 patients who discarded their oocytes, 71 patients (35%) requested disposal after having a child. Twenty-six (13%) discarded oocytes because of worsening cancer and three (1.4%) discarded because of death. 16 (8%) discarded oocytes due to cost of cryopreservation and eight (4%) due to low oocyte yield. Ten (5%) patients underwent new IVF cycles and discarded previously stored oocytes. Sixty-seven patients (33%) discarded oocytes for unspecified reasons. When comparing patients who discarded oocytes with those who did not, the former had lower AMH (2.7 vs 3.5 ng/ml, p < 0.001) but otherwise comparable age and number of cryopreserved oocytes. The mean age for those with continued cryopreservation was 35.4 years at time of OC and 40 years at time of data collection in June 2023.
conclusionChildbirth was the most common reason to dispose of oocytes followed by unspecified reasons. Larger studies of oocyte disposal may better define clinical characteristics of patients most likely to use, maintain or discard their oocytes.
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.