ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2025
A diluted one-step warming protocol: survival of vitrified blastocyst.
Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. 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.
- Multi-omics and developmental comparison of direct and conventional warming methods in vitrified human and mouse cleavage-stage embryos.Human reproduction (Oxford, England) · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeThe objective of this study was to compare the effects of two warming protocols (three step vs. one-step) on re-expansion and post-warming survival of human blastocysts previously vitrified using the standard vitrification protocol.
methodsOne hundred vitrified blastocysts were included in the study; 50 blastocysts were warmed using the standard warming protocol, and 50 were warmed using the diluted one-step warming protocol (DS 37 °C, 3 min; WS RT 5 min; culture dish until embryo transfer).
resultsThere was no significant difference in survival 2 h post-warming between the standard warming protocol and the diluted one-step warming protocol (98% vs 94%; p = 0.3), nor was there any difference in the number of embryos that were completely re-expanded, hatching or hatched when evaluated 2 h post-warming (84% vs 80%; p = 0.6). Those results indicate that vitrified blastocysts were able to survive equally between the two investigated protocols.
conclusionThe diluted one-step warming of vitrified blastocysts in 0.5 M sucrose showed no negative effects on embryo re-expansion and post-warming embryo survival when compared with the standard warming method. Therefore, the elimination of the first step of the standard warming procedure (TS, 37 °C, 1 min), the most difficult at a practical level, not only allows the reduction of the execution time, but above all, reduces the learning curve while maintaining effectiveness.
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.