ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2025
Comparison of conventional ICSI and rescue ICSI in patients without severe male factor and poor oocyte yield.
Article in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- ICSI shows no advantage over conventional IVF in patients with unexpected low oocyte yield.Annals of medicine · 2026Article
- Commentary: Comparison of conventional ICSI and rescue ICSI in patients without severe male factor and poor oocyte yield.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The aim of this study was to explore the effectivity and safety of early rescue intracytoplasmic sperm injection (R-ICSI) in patients with poor oocyte yield and non-severe male factor. Methods: This study was a retrospective cohort analysis which included 604 conventional ICSI cycles and 116 early R-ICSI cycles at the Northwest Women's and Children's Hospital from February 2014 to December 2023. All patients were during their first assisted reproductive technologies (ART) cycle with 3-5 retrieved oocytes. The male partner had normal or mildly impaired sperm parameters. We compared the reproductive outcomes of conventional ICSI and early R-ICSI cycles in such patients. Results: We observed that there were no significant differences in the MII (86.75 versus 85.09%; Conclusions: Despite the higher MPN rate, comparable outcomes can be achieved following early R-ICSI when compared to conventional ICSI for couples with non-severe male factor and poor oocyte yield.
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.