ArticleReproductive health2025
Pregnancy and obstetric-neonatal outcomes of patients with thin endometrium using three different endometrial preparation protocols in frozen embryo transfer cycles: a historical cohort of 2671 patients.
Article in Reproductive health, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundEndometrial thickness independently predicts pregnancy outcomes in frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles. Thin endometrium always results in implantation failure and worse obstetric-neonatal outcomes. However, it has not been reported which endometrial preparation strategy achieved optimal outcomes in patients with thin endometrium undergoing FET cycles.
methodsThis historical cohort study was conducted on 2671 women with thin endometrium who underwent their first FET cycle at the Reproductive Medicine Center of a university-affiliated hospital between January 2018 and August 2022 (followed up to August 2023). Patients were divided into three groups according to endometrial preparation protocols (NC: natural cycle, AC: artificial cycle, GnRH-a + AC: AC with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist pretreatment). Thin endometrium was defined as endometrial thickness < 8 mm on the first day of progesterone administration. Patients with uterine abnormalities, recurrent spontaneous abortion, or donor oocytes were excluded. We also further analyzed the condition of endometrial thickness < 7 mm. Pregnancy and obstetric-neonatal outcomes were assessed.
resultsA total of 2671 patients were included in the study. Among patients with endometrial thickness < 8 mm, the clinical pregnancy rate was 36.2% (691/1908) in the AC group, 35.2% (178/506) in the GnRH-a + AC group, and 33.9% (87/257) in the NC group. The live birth rates were 26.8% (512/1908), 25.3% (128/506), and 27.6% (71/257) in the three groups, respectively. No statistical differences were observed in pregnancy rates or obstetric-neonatal outcomes in pairwise comparisons, except that the biochemical pregnancy loss rate in the NC group was significantly lower than that in the AC group (3.9% versus 8.6%, P < 0.05). Furthermore, this result remained consistent after multivariate logistic regression (crude odds ratio [95% CI]: 0.428 [0.223,0.821], adjusted odds ratio [95% CI]: 0.444 [0.230,0.856]). For patients with endometrial thickness < 7 mm, there were no significant differences in any outcomes across the three groups.
conclusionsAnalysis using the 8 mm cut-off revealed a lower biochemical pregnancy loss rate in the NC group compared to the AC group. In contrast, no significant differences were observed in clinical pregnancy, live birth, or obstetric-neonatal outcomes based on endometrial preparation strategy for patients with an endometrial thickness < 7 mm or 8 mm.
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.