ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2024
Maternal age at transfer following autologous oocyte cryopreservation is not associated with live birth rates.
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 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Live birth outcomes after first donor oocyte embryo transfer: a comparison by treatment pathways in poor prognosis patients.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2025Article
- Live birth outcomes after euploid transfer: autologous vs. donor oocyte embryos in patients aged > 35 years.F&S reports · 2025Article
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
purposeOur aim was to evaluate if maternal age at transfer following autologous oocyte cryopreservation is associated with live birth rate (LBR).
methodsWe performed a retrospective cohort study of all patients who thawed autologous oocytes and then underwent a single frozen euploid embryo transfer between 2011 and 2021 at a large urban university-affiliated fertility center. Each oocyte thaw patient was matched 2:1 to in vitro fertilization (IVF) patients who underwent single embryo transfer < 1 year after retrieval. Primary outcome was LBR. Secondary outcomes included implantation rates (IR) and spontaneous abortion rates (SABR).
resultsA total of 169 oocyte thaw patients were matched to 338 IVF patients. As expected, oocyte thaw patients were older (median age 42.5 vs. 37.6 years, p < 0.001) and waited longer between retrieval and transfer than in vitro fertilization patients (median time 59 vs. 1 month, p < 0.001). In univariate analysis, implantation and LBR differed among oocyte thaw and IVF patients (p < 0.05), but SABR did not (p = 0.57). Transfer outcomes in oocyte thaw patients did not differ based on transfer age group (IR: p = 0.18; SABR: p = 0.12; LBR: p = 0.24). In a multiple logistic regression model, age at transfer was not predictive of live birth when controlling for age at retrieval, embryo morphology, and day of blastulation.
conclusionsMaternal age at transfer after oocyte cryopreservation is not predictive of LBR; this suggests that "an aging womb" does not impair LBR after oocyte thaw and empowers patients to return for transfer when ready for childbearing.
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.