SynthesisJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2025
Reconsidering the clinical value of 1PN-derived embryos: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Synthesis 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. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Not all abnormal fertilization is equal: occurrence, developmental competence, and ploidy outcomes of 1PN, 3PN, and 2.1PN zygotes in ICSI/PGT-A cycles.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2026Article
- Non-linear impact of abnormal fertilization on sibling 2PN embryo development: a 107,527-embryo cohort study defining a novel clinical tipping point.Journal of translational medicine · 2026Article
- To discard or to not discard 2.1PN? A systematic review and evidence table analysis.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2026Review
- Live birth following transfer of a euploid blastocyst derived from a 5PN zygote: a case report.Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics · 2026Article
- Cleavage-stage stratification reveals the clinical and developmental potential of 0PN embryos compared with 2PN embryos in IVF.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
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
purposeTo assess if 1PN-derived embryos are diploid/euploid and suitable for embryo transfer.
methodsThis systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted according to the Meta-Analysis of Observational Studies in Epidemiology (MOOSE) guidelines. PubMed, Embase, and SCOPUS were systematically searched for peer-reviewed original papers using relevant keywords and Medical Subject Heading (MeSH) terms: "1PN" OR "monopronucleated" OR "single pronucleus" AND "cleavage" OR "embryo quality" OR "blastocyst quality" OR "blastulation" OR "embryo development" OR "euploidy" OR "ploidy" OR "pregnancy" OR "live birth" OR "miscarriage" OR "clinical outcomes" OR "malformation."
resultsA total of 21 studies met the inclusion criteria. Compared to 2PN-derived embryos, 1PN-derived embryos exhibited a lower blastulation rate and clinical outcomes when transferred without prior genetic testing. However, 1PN-derived embryos demonstrated similar euploidy and live birth rates following euploid blastocyst transfer, as well as comparable malformation rates to their 2PN counterparts. A non-significant trend toward a higher risk of abnormal ploidy constitution was observed in 1PN-derived embryos. Notably, pregnancy and live birth rates were significantly lower for 1PN-derived embryos from ICSI compared to those from conventional IVF.
conclusions1PN-derived embryos, though less competent than 2PNs, can lead to healthy live births. They may be cautiously utilized in clinical practice, particularly when biparental diploidy has been confirmed. CLINICAL
trial registrationCRD42024605305.
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.