ArticleJournal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences2025
Comparison of Assisted Hatching Techniques and Their Impact on Clinical Pregnancy Outcomes with Optimization Strategies in
Article in Journal of pharmacy & bioallied sciences, 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
Background: Infertility is a prevalent reproductive issue, often requiring assisted reproductive techniques (ART) such as Objectives: This study aims to evaluate the impact of assisted hatching techniques-laser hatching and mechanical hatching-on clinical pregnancy outcomes and implantation success in women with advanced maternal age, recurrent IVF failures, or embryos with a thick zona pellucida. The study also seeks to compare these techniques with a control group receiving no AH. Methodology: A total of 180 participants will be divided into three groups: laser hatching, mechanical hatching, and a control group (no assisted hatching), with 60 participants in each group. Embryos will be assessed for suitability, and AH will be performed using laser or mechanical techniques. Following embryo transfer, clinical pregnancy outcomes and implantation rates will be monitored and compared across the groups. Expected Results: It is anticipated that assisted hatching, particularly laser-assisted hatching, will lead to higher implantation and clinical pregnancy rates compared to the control group. The study aims to establish whether AH can significantly enhance IVF success in specific patient populations. Study Implications: Findings from this research could provide valuable insights into optimizing assisted hatching techniques for improving IVF outcomes. If AH proves beneficial, it may be recommended as a standard adjunct in ART, particularly for high-risk patient groups. Additionally, the study will contribute to understanding the limitations and cost-effectiveness of AH in clinical practice.
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.