ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2025
Impact of COVID-19 on live birth and perinatal outcomes following subsequent frozen-thawed embryo transfer.
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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
purposeTo evaluate whether prior SARS-CoV-2 infection adversely affects live birth and perinatal outcomes following subsequent frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) and to further investigate whether the time interval between infection and embryo transfer influences pregnancy outcomes.
methodsIn this retrospective cohort study, women who tested positive for SARS-CoV-2 before FET were designated as the infected group (n = 1081), while asymptomatic and test-negative women were included as controls (n = 865). The infected group was further subdivided into four subgroups according to the time interval from infection to FET: ≤ 30, 31-60, 61-90, and ≥ 91 days.
resultsOverall, positive HCG rate was significantly lower in the infected group compared to the non-infected group (62.9% vs. 67.5%, adjusted OR = 0.80, 95% CI = 0.66-0.97, P = 0.021), while no significant differences were observed in live birth rates (45.9% vs. 49.7%, adjusted OR = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.70-1.01, P = 0.062). There were no significant differences in clinical pregnancy, pregnancy loss, or any of the measured obstetric and neonatal outcomes between groups. However, women in the ≤ 30 days' subgroup were associated with a significant reduction in positive HCG (adjusted OR = 0.52, 95% CI = 0.33-0.84, P = 0.007), clinical pregnancy (adjusted OR = 0.60, 95% CI = 0.38-0.95, P = 0.029), and live birth rates (adjusted OR = 0.51, 95% CI = 0.31-0.83, P = 0.006) compared to those in the non-infected group, while no such association was observed with the other subgroups.
conclusionsIn those undergoing FET, overall, prior SARS-CoV-2 infection does not adversely affect live birth and perinatal outcomes. However, considering the decreased likelihood of live birth among women with shorter intervals, delaying the subsequent FET for at least 30 days after infection could be beneficial.
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.