ArticleF&S reports2025
Outcomes of assisted reproductive technology after radical abdominal trachelectomy for early-stage cervical cancer.
Article in F&S reports, 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
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: To investigate clinical characteristics and in vitro fertilization (IVF) outcomes in patients after radical abdominal trachelectomy (RAT) for early-stage cervical cancer. Design: A retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent IVF after RAT between January 2009 and December 2022, with comparison to age-matched controls. Subjects: Forty-one patients who underwent RAT for early-stage cervical cancer and subsequently sought IVF, compared with 82 age-matched controls. Exposure: Radical abdominal trachelectomy as a fertility-sparing surgery for early-stage cervical cancer, followed by IVF. Main Outcome Measures: Embryological outcomes, clinical pregnancy rates, live birth rates, and factors influencing IVF success, including age at first oocyte retrieval, ovarian response parameters, number of oocytes retrieved, presence of cervical stenosis, and endometrial thickness at embryo transfer (ET) were compared between the RAT and control groups. Results: The RAT group had similar anti-mullerian hormone levels and embryological outcomes compared with controls. In the RAT group, clinical pregnancy and live birth rates were 68.3% (28/41) and 58.5% (24/41) per patient and 20.8% (37/178) and 15.7% (28/178) per ET, respectively. These rates were comparable to those in the control group, which were 62.2% (51/82) and 50.0% (41/82) per patient and 25.4% (80/314) and 16.6% (52/314) per ET, respectively. In the RAT group, live birth outcomes were associated with younger age at first oocyte retrieval, higher number of oocytes retrieved, fewer cases of cervical stenosis, and greater endometrial thickness at ET. An endometrial thickness of 9.2 mm was identified as the optimal statistical boundary for predicting both clinical pregnancy and live birth. Conclusion: The live birth rate in the RAT group was comparable to that in the age-matched control group, indicating that RAT does not negatively impact assisted reproductive technologies outcomes. Age at first oocyte retrieval, number of oocytes retrieved, presence of cervical stenosis, and endometrial thickness at ET may influence IVF outcomes after RAT.
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.