Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41238709›Full record

Trial reportScientific reports2025

Quasi-randomized pilot clinical trial comparing the use of annexin columns in patients with abnormal sperm FISH undergoing IVF techniques.

Borja Tejero, Juan Carlos Martínez, Irene Eleno, Pilar Matallín, Ana Fernández-Peinado, Inmaculada Bernabeu-Egea, Jana Valdés, Francisco Quereda

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06524102 (Evaluation of the Efficacy of Annexin Columns), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT06524102 nacompletednot on this map

Evaluation of the Efficacy of Annexin Columns (MACS) in Patients With Altered Sperm FISH Undergoing Assisted Reproductive Techniques

TypeinterventionalSponsorInstituto de Investigación Sanitaria y Biomédica de AlicanteRan2018 to 2022Enrolled10ConditionsInfertility, MaleArmsMagnetic Activated Cell Sorting
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Borja TejeroInstituto de Investigación Sanitaria y Biomédica de Alicante (ISABIAL), Hospital General Universitario Dr. Balmis, Avda. Pintor Baeza, 12, Alicante, 03010, Spain.
Juan Carlos MartínezHospital General Universitario Dr. Balmis, Avda. Pintor Baeza, 12, Alicante, 03010, Spain.
Irene ElenoHospital General Universitario Dr. Balmis, Avda. Pintor Baeza, 12, Alicante, 03010, Spain.
Pilar MatallínInstituto de Investigación Sanitaria y Biomédica de Alicante (ISABIAL), Hospital General Universitario Dr. Balmis, Avda. Pintor Baeza, 12, Alicante, 03010, Spain.
Ana Fernández-PeinadoHospital General Universitario Dr. Balmis, Avda. Pintor Baeza, 12, Alicante, 03010, Spain.
Inmaculada Bernabeu-EgeaHospital General Universitario Dr. Balmis, Avda. Pintor Baeza, 12, Alicante, 03010, Spain.
Jana ValdésHospital General Universitario Dr. Balmis, Avda. Pintor Baeza, 12, Alicante, 03010, Spain.
Francisco QueredaHospital Universitario San Juan de Alicante, Universidad Miguel Hernández, Ctra. Valencia, Sant Joan d'Alacant, Alicante, 03550, Spain. fj.quereda@umh.es.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-4521-9033

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Several studies have shown that Magnetic Activated Cell Sorting (MACS), also known as annexin columns, are capable of eliminating sperm with chromosomal abnormalities in IVF. So, it is a promising tool for men with abnormal sperm FISH results, since they select better-quality gametes with normal chromosomal content, mitigating the poor reproductive outcomes caused by this alteration. Our study (quasi-randomized clinical trial) is the first to evaluate the efficacy of MACS in patients with abnormal sperm FISH results in terms of IVF laboratory results. In addition, we communicate a descriptive analysis of the cases in which sperm FISH was performed during the study period to investigate the prevalence of abnormal results among the indications for which this technique was requested. The overall prevalence of patients with abnormal sperm FISH results was 8.5%, but it varied. This prevalence was 13.9% when indication for the analysis was male factor, 9.1% when recurrent miscarriages in combination with male factor, and 2.7% when only recurrent miscarriage. The use of MACS in addition to conventional technique for patients with abnormal sperm FISH results undergoing IVF-ICIS reported no differences versus the control group in fertilization rates (66.7% vs. 69%, p = 0.75), abnormal fertilization (8.3% vs. 4.2%, p = 0.49), biopsiable embryos (87.5% vs. 83.7%, p = 0.73) and euploidy (30.8% vs. 30%, p = 0.93). Sperm FISH analysis is a useful test in the diagnosis of infertility for couples with male factor and/or recurrent miscarriage. The use of MACS in patients with abnormal sperm FISH showed no evidence of differences in the laboratory results analysed in the limited cohort studied. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT06524102.

Indexed as

Chromosome AberrationsFertilization in VitroInfertility, MaleSpermatozoaAdultFemaleHumansIn Situ Hybridization, FluorescenceMalePilot ProjectsPregnancyAnnexin columnsIn vitro fertilizationPreimplantation genetic test for aneuploidySperm FISH

Identifiers

PMID41238709
PMCPMC12618552

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.