ArticleJournal of human reproductive sciences
Should We Be Offering Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection to All Couples with Unexplained Infertility: A Cohort Study.
Article in Journal of human reproductive sciences. 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: In unexplained infertility (UI), the use of intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) has been increased to prevent total fertilisation failure (TFF). However, there is little evidence to support improved clinical outcomes. Aim: The aim of the study was to assess whether ICSI improves the outcomes compared to conventional Settings and Design: A retrospective cohort study in a tertiary centre. Materials and Methods: Patients were divided into two groups. Group A in which ICSI-cycles were performed and Group B in which IVF-cycles were performed. All UI couples with females aged between 21 and 38 years who underwent the first long GnRH-agonist or GnRH-antagonist protocol stimulation cycle followed by fresh embryo transfer were included. UI couples who needed rescue-ICSI, donor-recipient cycles and pre-implantation genetic diagnosis were excluded. Outcomes were fertilisation rate, TFF, good-quality day 3 embryo, implantation rate, miscarriage rate and clinical pregnancy rate. Statistical Analysis Used: STATA 18.0 software (Stata Corp, TX, USA) was used. Results: A total of 511 UI patients were included out of which 182 underwent ICSI and 310 underwent IVF cycles. Baseline characteristics were similar in both groups. The mean percentage fertilisation rate was comparable in the ICSI and IVF groups (67.18 ± 22.61 vs. 66.93 ± 26.66, Conclusion: The study reported reduced TFF in the ICSI group in comparison to the IVF group but was not statistically significant with comparable clinical outcomes.
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.