ArticleCureus2024
Assessing the Impact of Genratest on Women With Recurrent Implantation Failure: A Single-Center Study.
Article in Cureus, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- The Role of a Standardised Two-session Peri-transfer Acupuncture Protocol in Frozen Embryo Transfer for Women with Recurrent Implantation Failure: A Retrospective Cohort Study.Journal of human reproductive sciencesArticle
Corrections and comments
- Erratum issued
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective Recurrent implantation failure (RIF) is a significant challenge in assisted reproduction. Genratest has emerged as a potential tool to identify the displaced window of implantation (WOI). This study aimed to evaluate the impact of this test on the pregnancy outcomes of RIF patients. Methods A retrospective analysis was conducted on 143 RIF patients who were categorized into two groups: the personalized embryo transfer (pET, n=69) group and standard embryo transfer (sET, n=74) group. The main measured outcomes were clinical pregnancy, ongoing pregnancy, miscarriage, and live birth rates. Results Genratest effectively diagnoses the displaced WOI in 90% of RIF patients. The pET group exhibited a higher rate of clinical pregnancy (n=36/69, 52.2%) compared to the sET group (n=35/74, 47.3%), but this difference was not statistically significant (p=0.679). Ongoing pregnancy rates were comparable between the pET (n=28/69, 40.6%) and the sET (n=30/74, 40.5%) groups (p=0.996). Live birth rates showed no statistically significant difference between the two groups (n=26/69, 37.7% versus n=22/74, 29.7%, p=0.407). Miscarriage rates were similar in both groups (n=9/69, 13% versus n=11/74, 14.9%, p=0.942). Conclusions pET based on the results of the Genratest did not show a significant improvement in pregnancy outcomes, including clinical pregnancy, ongoing pregnancy, live birth, or miscarriage rates. Further research is needed to identify the role of Genratest in RIF patients.
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.