ArticleFrontiers in medicine2025
Effects of different granulocyte colony stimulating factor regimens on patients with euploid embryo transfer in recurrent implantation failure.
Article in Frontiers in medicine, 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: This retrospective cohort study aimed to investigate the effects of different colony-stimulating factor regimens in patients with recurrent implantation failure who underwent euploid embryo transfer. Methods: In total, 293 women with a history of recurrent implantation failure were included. The participants were divided into three groups: Group 1 received intrauterine granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) 5 days before embryo transfer; Group 2 received both intrauterine G-CSF and subcutaneous G-CSF from 5 days before embryo transfer until pregnancy; and Group 3 served as the control. Hormonal treatment included a 14-day regimen of oral estradiol followed by vaginal and intramuscular progesterone. Results: Primary outcomes included pregnancy, biochemical pregnancy, miscarriage, and live birth rates. The pregnancy rate (positive serum hCG) was significantly higher in group 2 compared to the control (65.9% vs. 50.5%). Group 1 had a higher pregnancy rate than the control, but the difference was not statistically significant (56.8% vs. 50.5%). Live birth rates were statistically significantly higher in Group 2 than Group 3 (55.7% vs. 40.6%). Group 2 had a higher live birth rate than group 1, but the difference was not statistically significant (55.7% vs. 47.3%). Although Group 1 had a higher live birth rate than Group 3, the difference was not statistically significant (47.3% vs. 40.6%). Conclusion: Addition of subcutaneous G-CSF to intrauterine injections may be associated with improved positive pregnancy test results and live birth rates in recurrent implantation failure.
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.