ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2024
Evaluating the developmental potential of 2.1PN-derived embryos and associated chromosomal analysis.
Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 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, 2 citations in OpenAlex.
- Not all abnormal fertilization is equal: occurrence, developmental competence, and ploidy outcomes of 1PN, 3PN, and 2.1PN zygotes in ICSI/PGT-A cycles.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2026Article
- To discard or to not discard 2.1PN? A systematic review and evidence table analysis.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2026Review
- Incidence of haploidy and triploidy in trophectoderm biopsies of blastocysts derived from normally and abnormally fertilized oocytes.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 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 at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
purposeZygotes with 2.1 pronuclei (2.1PN) present with two normal-sized pronuclei, and an additional smaller pronucleus, that is approximately smaller than two thirds the size of a normal pronucleus. It remains unclear whether the additional pronucleus causes embryonic chromosome abnormalities. In the majority of cases, in vitro fertilization (IVF) clinics discarded 2.1PN zygotes. Thus, the present study aimed to evaluate the developmental potential and value of 2.1PN zygotes.
methods2.1PN-derived embryos from 164 patients who underwent IVF or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) treatment between January 2021 and December 2022 were included in the present study. All embryos were monitored using a time-lapse system, and blastocyst formation was used to assess 2.1PN-derived embryo developmental potential. The blastocyst formation was quantified using generalized estimating equations, and chromosome euploidy was analyzed using next-generation sequencing (NGS). In addition, the potential association between age and occurrence of 2.1PN zygotes was determined.
resultsThe present study demonstrated that numerous 2.1PN zygotes developed into blastocysts. Early cleavage patterns and embryo quality on Day 3 were the independent predictors for the blastocyst formation of 2.1PN-derived embryos. The 2.1PN zygotes displayed a comparable developmental potential compared to 2PN zygotes in advanced age patients (≥ 38). Moreover, there was a tendency that 2.1PN-derived blastocysts showed a similar euploidy rate compared to 2PN-derived blastocysts.
conclusionClinicians should consider using 2.1PN-derived euploid embryos for transfer after preimplantation genetic testing in the absence of available 2PN embryo cycles. 2.1PN-derived embryos could be a candidate, particularly beneficial for patients at advanced age.
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.