Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38933826›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2024

Embryo transfer impact: a comprehensive national cohort analysis comparing maternal and neonatal outcomes across varied embryo stages in fresh and frozen transfers.

Chih-Ting Chang, Shih-Feng Weng, Hui-Yu Chuang, I-Le Hsu, Chia-Yi Hsu, Eing-Mei Tsai

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

6 authors.

Chih-Ting ChangDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kaohsiung Medical University Chung-Ho Memorial Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Shih-Feng WengDepartment of Healthcare Administration and Medical Informatics, Kaohsiung Medical University, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Hui-Yu ChuangDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kaohsiung Medical University Chung-Ho Memorial Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
I-Le HsuDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kaohsiung Municipal Ta-Tung Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Chia-Yi HsuDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kaohsiung Medical University Chung-Ho Memorial Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.
Eing-Mei TsaiDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kaohsiung Medical University Chung-Ho Memorial Hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: The utilization of frozen embryo transfer not only enhances reproductive outcomes by elevating the likelihood of live birth and clinical pregnancy but also improves safety by mitigating the risks associated with ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) and multiple pregnancies. There has been an increasing debate in recent years regarding the advisability of making elective frozen embryo transfer the standard practice. Our study aims to determine the optimal choice between fresh and frozen embryo transfer, as well as whether the transfer should occur at the cleavage or blastocyst stage. Method: In this retrospective cohort study conducted in Taiwan, data from the national assisted reproductive technology (ART) database spanning from January 1st, 2013, to December 31st, 2017, were analyzed. The study included 51,762 eligible female participants who underwent ART and embryo transfer. Pregnancy outcomes, maternal complications, and singleton neonatal outcomes were evaluated using the National Health Insurance Database from January 1st, 2013, to December 31st, 2018. Cases were categorized into groups based on whether they underwent fresh or frozen embryo transfers, with further subdivision into cleavage stage and blastocyst stage transfers. Exposure variables encompassed clinical pregnancy rate, live birth rate, OHSS, pregnancy-induced hypertension, gestational diabetes mellitus (DM), placenta previa, placental abruption, preterm premature rupture of membranes (PPROM), gestational age, newborn body weight, and route of delivery. Results: Frozen blastocyst transfers showed higher rates of clinical pregnancy (CPR) and live births (LBR) compared to fresh blastocyst transfers. Conversely, frozen cleavage stage transfers demonstrated lower rates of clinical pregnancy and live birth compared to fresh cleavage stage transfers. Frozen embryo transfers were associated with reduced risks of OHSS but were linked to a higher risk of pregnancy-induced hypertension compared to fresh embryo transfers. Additionally, frozen embryo transfers were associated with a higher incidence of large for gestational age infants and a lower incidence of small for gestational age infants. Conclusion: The freeze-all strategy may not be suitable for universal application. When embryos can develop to the blastocyst stage, FET is a favorable choice, but embryos can only develop to the cleavage stage, fresh embryo transfer becomes a more reasonable option.

Indexed as

CryopreservationEmbryo TransferPregnancy OutcomeAdultBlastocystCohort StudiesFemaleFertilization in VitroHumansInfant, NewbornLive BirthPregnancyPregnancy RateRetrospective StudiesTaiwanassisted reproductive technologyblastocyst stagecleavage stagefrozen embryo transferIVF

Identifiers

PMID38933826
PMCPMC11199782

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.