ArticleBMJ open2025
Association between endometrial echo on transfer day and pregnancy outcomes in thawed embryo transfer: a retrospective cohort study across different preparation protocols.
Article in BMJ open, 2025. 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
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aimed to investigate the relationship between endometrial echo and pregnancy outcome in patients undergoing thawed embryo transfer and explore the effect of different endometrial preparation schemes on endometrial echo.
methodsA retrospective analysis was conducted on data from 2910 patients who underwent freeze-thaw embryo transfer (FET)-assisted pregnancy in the reproductive medicine centre of our hospital from January 2019 to March 2024. Based on the endometrial echo on the transplantation day, the patients were divided into two groups: the endometrial echo uniform group and the endometrial echo uneven group. Based on the endometrial preparation protocol, they were divided into the natural cycle (NC) group, hormone replacement cycle (HRT) group, and downregulated combined HRT (GnRHa+HRT) group. The general data, pregnancy outcome and endometrial echo of those undergoing different endometrial preparation protocols were compared.
resultsThe clinical pregnancy rate in the homogeneous endometrial echo group was significantly higher than that in the non-homogeneous endometrial echo group. The equalisation rate of endometrial echo in the NC group and GnRHa+HRT group was significantly higher than that in the HRT group (p<0.05). Binary logistic regression analysis revealed that homogeneous endometrial echo was associated with a significantly improved clinical pregnancy rate of patients with FET. After adjusting for confounding factors, we found that compared with the HRT endometrial preparation protocol, NC and GnRHa+HRT endometrial preparation protocol significantly improved homogeneous endometrial echo.
conclusionNon-homogeneous endometrial echo on the transplantation day was associated with a decreased clinical pregnancy rate of FET. The endometrial preparation protocol of the NC and GnRHa+HRT cycle can improve homogeneous endometrial echo. In FET, clinicians should develop a personalised endometrial preparation protocol based on patients' situations.
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.