SynthesisActa obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica2026
Impact of double versus single blastocyst biopsy and vitrification on clinical and neonatal outcomes in PGT cycles: A systematic review and meta-analysis of embryo retesting.
Synthesis in Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Impact of double versus single blastocyst biopsy and vitrification on clinical and neonatal outcomes in PGT cycles: A systematic review and meta-analysis of embryo retesting.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2026Pooled it
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
introductionAs PGT advances in assisted reproduction, more embryos with inconclusive results, yet potentially transferable, have emerged. Current studies reveal a disparity between the reproductive potential of retested blastocysts and the supporting evidence. This systematic review and meta-analysis compared clinical outcomes of rebiopsied and revitrified blastocysts with those biopsied and vitrified once. MATERIAL AND
methodsSearches were conducted on June 26, 2024, across PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science, and Google Scholar, using thesaurus and free-text terms. Selection, data extraction, and risk of bias were assessed by three independent reviewers. The primary outcomes were live birth rate (LBR) and singleton birthweight; secondary outcomes were clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), clinical pregnancy loss rate (CPLR), positive pregnancy rate, very early pregnancy loss rate, and neonatal outcomes. Quantitative analyzes were performed using a random-effects model, pooling dichotomous outcomes as odds ratios (OR) and 95% CI and continuous outcomes as mean differences (MD) using the inverse variance model. Subgroup analyses based on "biopsy day" and "morphological grades" were performed.
resultsSeventeen studies were included, reporting 36,441 SET cycles. Very low-quality evidence suggests that rebiopsy and revitrification were associated with a decreased likelihood of LBR compared with single biopsy and vitrification (OR = 0.54, 95% CI = 0.44-0.67; I
conclusionsDecision-making on retesting embryos for PGT should be done with caution, as it might reduce live birth rate in order to obtain the precise genetic diagnosis. Larger and well-designed studies, controlling for the main sources of bias, are still needed in order to improve the quality of the available evidence.
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.