ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2025
Pregnancy and neonatal outcomes of blastocysts without blastocoele re-expansion in FET patients: are they of clinical value?
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. 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
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo study if the transfer of warmed blastocysts without blastocoele re-expansion is effective and safe.
methodsThree thousand one hundred ninety-six frozen-thawed single blastocyst transfer cycles were conducted. The embryos were categorized into two groups based on the occurrence of blastocoele re-expansion following a post-warming culture period of 3-4 h, including non-re-expanded blastocyst transfer group (n = 431) and re-expanded blastocyst transfer group (n = 2765). Propensity score matching was utilized to mitigate potential confounding factors across groups. The pregnancy and neonatal outcomes were analyzed and compared between the two groups before and after the implementation of propensity score matching.
resultsThe rates of biochemical pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, intrauterine implantation, and live birth were significantly lower in the group that received a single frozen-thawed blastocyst without blastocoele re-expansion transfer, in comparison to the re-expanded blastocyst transfer group (before matching: 29.5% versus 60.7%, 21.6% versus 51.9%, 22.3% versus 52.0%, and 16.9% versus 41.6%, respectively, all P < 0.01). However, upon evaluating the pregnancy outcomes, no statistically significant differences were observed in the rates of ectopic pregnancy, miscarriage, multiple gestation, multiple births, and gestational age (P > 0.05) between the two groups. Furthermore, no significant differences were observed in neonatal outcomes, including live born infants, birth weight, delivery, and birth defects. Additionally, similar findings were also noted in the two matched cohorts after propensity score matching.
conclusionWarmed blastocysts that do not exhibit blastocoele re-expansion following a 3-4-h culture may be considered for transfer rather than being discarded in frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) cycles, resulting in acceptable 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.