ArticleJournal of anesthesia2024
The effect of assisted reproductive technology on postpartum bleeding: hormonal cycle frozen embryo transfer might increase blood loss.
Article in Journal of anesthesia, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Quantitative and calculated estimated blood loss in cesarean deliveries for twin and singleton pregnancies: a retrospective analysis.Journal of anesthesia · 2024Article
- Pathologic maternal and neonatal outcomes associated with programmed embryo transfer.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2024Review
- Pathologic maternal and neonatal outcomes associated with programmed embryo transfer: potential etiologies and strategies for prevention.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAmong assisted reproductive technologies, frozen thawed embryo transfer (FET) is associated with increased blood loss at delivery. Anesthesiologists need to be aware of new factors that affect postpartum blood loss. This study investigated whether FET cycles with or without hormonal support affect the amount of postpartum bleeding.
methodsWe conducted a retrospective cohort study of patients admitted for delivery at a single university hospital between January 2015 and December 2018. Patients were divided into no-assisted reproductive technology (No-ART), hormonal cycle FET (HC-FET) and natural cycle FET (NC-FET) group. The primary outcome was the amount of blood loss after delivery (median [interquartile range]), which was compared among the three groups. Multiple regression analysis was performed to investigate the factors affecting blood loss.
resultsBetween 2015 and 2018, 3187 women delivered neonates. In vaginal delivery, postpartum blood loss in the HC-FET group (1060 [830] g) was significantly greater than in the NC-FET group (650 [485] g, P = 0.001) and in the No-ART group (590 [420] g P < 0.001). Multiple linear regression analysis showed that HC-FET (P < 0.001) was one of the independent factors for the amount of bleeding. In cesarean delivery, the HC-FET group had more blood loss than the No-ART group (910 [676] g vs. 784 [524] g, P = 0.039). However, HC-FET was not an independent factor for postpartum blood loss.
conclusionsThe HC-FET group had more blood loss than the No-ART group for both vaginal and cesarean deliveries. Furthermore, HC-FET was an independent factor that increased postpartum blood loss in vaginal deliveries.
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.