ReviewArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2026
Effects of different ovulation induction protocols on pregnancy outcomes of fresh cycles in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer with donor sperm.
Review in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2026. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThis study analyzed clinical pregnancy outcomes in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer with donor sperm (IVF-D) using different ovulation induction protocols, to provide reference data for selecting appropriate protocols.
methodsData from 1801 cycles in patients who underwent IVF-D in Peking University Third Hospital between June 2010 and June 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. Participants were divided into three groups based on the controlled ovarian hyperstimulation protocol: follicular-phase ultralong gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a), luteal-phase GnRH-a long, and gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH-ant) protocol groups.
resultsSignificant differences were observed among the groups in gonadotropin (Gn) starting dose, Gn administration duration, total Gn dose, estradiol level on the day of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) administration (hCG day), progesterone level on hCG day, luteinizing hormone level on hCG day, endometrial thickness on hCG day, and number of embryos transferred (p < 0.05). We also found significant group differences in the number of eggs retrieved, two pronucleizygotes, and cleavages (p < 0.05), but not in high-quality embryos (p < 0.05). Clinical pregnancy and live birth rates significantly differed among the three groups (p < 0.05), whereas ectopic pregnancy, early miscarriage, and multiple pregnancy rates did not (p < 0.05).
conclusionIn fresh embryo transfer cycles, the GnRH-ant protocol required the shortest duration of Gn administration and lowest total Gn dose, whereas the GnRH-a long protocol had the highest clinical pregnancy rate. Therefore, the GnRH-a long protocol is considered the preferred method for female patients who can undergo fresh transfers during IVF-D cycles.
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.