ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2024
No improvement in pregnancy and perinatal outcomes with combined luteal support in modified natural cycle frozen embryo transfer.
Article in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: We investigated whether the addition of a luteal phase support drug benefits pregnancy and perinatal outcomes in modified natural-cycle frozen-thawed embryo transfer (mNC-FET) for women up to the age of 35 years. Methods: We analyzed the clinical data of 3658 mNC-FET cycles of women up to the age of 35 years from the Reproductive Center of the Third Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University from January 2018 to December 2020 in a retrospective cohort study. The cycles were divided into three groups based on the luteal phase support protocol used. The patients in group A received a combination of progesterone soft capsules and dydrogesterone (882 cycles), those in group B received dydrogesterone only (627 cycles), and those in group C received a combination of progesterone vaginal sustained-release gel and dydrogesterone (2149 cycles). Pregnancy and perinatal outcomes were compared among the three groups. Results: Logistic regression analysis indicated that the three luteal phase support regimens were not associated with the live birth rate [OR(95% CI)B vs A=1.080, Conclusions: In the mNC-FET cycle, patients under the age of 35 who chose dydrogesterone alone as a luteal phase support drug exhibited no difference in the live birth rate and perinatal outcome from patients who combined dydrogesterone with progesterone soft capsules or with progesterone vaginal sustained-release gel. However, the outcome still requires confirmation by large-sample prospective studies.
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.