ArticleJBRA assisted reproduction2026
Influence of seminal cryopreservation on embryo kinetics. Image analysis and clinical outcomes.
Article in JBRA assisted reproduction, 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
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveThis study aims to compare the effect of using fresh ejaculated sperm versus cryopreserved sperm on the morphology and kinetics of embryo development and on clinical reproductive outcomes.
methodsRetrospective, observational, single-centre study conducted at IVIRMA Alicante (June 2013-December 2020) that included 469 oocyte donation cycles with frozen, fresh and mixed eggs in which ICSI, IVF or IVF-ICSI with fresh ejaculated and frozen ejaculated partner sperm was performed. For each group, the morphokinetic variables t2, t3, t4, t5, t6, t7, t8, tM, tSB, tB, tEB were studied in addition to the clinical pregnancy rate, implantation rate, ongoing pregnancy rate, miscarriage rate, and live birth rate, per transfer and per embryo transferred. Statistical analysis was performed using the IBM SPSS® software. Values of p≤0.05 were considered statistically significant.
resultsLonger development times were observed in the fresh semen group, with significantly longer times for t2, t3, t4, t5, tB, tEB. Clinical results per transfer showed a trend, although not significant, towards lower rates in the cryopreserved semen group compared to the fresh semen group. However, the miscarriage rate was higher for the cryopreserved semen group, although this difference was not statistically significant.
conclusionsOur results indicate that embryos from fresh semen have a slower developmental rate for the morphokinetic parameters studied. Since no significant differences in clinical reproductive outcomes were found, it is concluded that sperm freezing is a valuable technique that can continue to be applied. However, further studies are needed to confirm these results.
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.