Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42463955›Full record

ArticleArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2026

Is assisted oocyte activation an effective method in poor responders?

Ayşe Altun Akpinar, Burçin Karamustafaoğlu Balcı, Çiğdem Çelik, Cemil Akgül

Abstract readComparative Study
In one paragraph

Article 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.

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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

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

4 authors.

Ayşe Altun AkpinarDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Istanbul Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Burçin Karamustafaoğlu BalcıDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Istanbul Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey. burcinkaramustafaoglu@yahoo.com.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5196-4502
Çiğdem ÇelikDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Istanbul Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey.
Cemil AkgülDepartment of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Istanbul Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul University, Istanbul, Turkey.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivePoor responders pose a significant challenge in fertility treatment, leading to decreased oocyte quality and fertilization rates. Assisted oocyte activation (AOA) has emerged as a method to improve fertilization rates. This study aims to evaluate the effect of AOA on fertilization, pregnancy, and live birth rates in patients with diminished ovarian reserve. MATERIALS AND

methodsThis prospective non-randomized comparative study included a cohort of infertility patients with diminished ovarian reserve, divided into three groups: the control group receiving standard treatment (Group I/Conventional ICSI), the electrical activation group undergoing piezoelectric stimulation (Group II/ICSI + Piezoelectric), and the chemical activation group treated with calcium ionophore (Group III/ICSI + Calcium Ionophore). Each group consisted of 50 patients. The effects of electrical and chemical activation applied after ICSI on fertilization, pregnancy, and live birth rates were evaluated.

resultsThere were no statistically significant differences among the groups in hormone levels (FSH, LH, E2, PRL, and AMH), number of oocytes, or number of MII oocytes. Fertilization rates were significantly higher in the piezoelectric group compared to the control group (p = 0.007). Although the fertilization rate in the calcium ionophore group was higher than that in the control group, this difference did not reach statistical significance (p = 1.000). There was no statistically significant difference in fertilization rates between the piezoelectric and calcium ionophore groups (p = 0.071). Regarding pregnancy rates, the highest implantation rate was observed in the calcium ionophore group (37%), but this difference does not reach statistical significance (p = 0.224). No significant differences were observed among the groups in embryo quality, clinical pregnancy, ongoing pregnancy, and live birth rates.

conclusionIn patients classified as diminished ovarian reserve, artificial oocyte activation (AOA) was associated with higher fertilization rates for increasing fertilization rates, potentially resulting in a greater number of fertilized oocytes and transferable embryos. However, this apparent benefit does not translate into improved biochemical pregnancy outcomes. Moreover, no significant differences were observed between groups in terms of embryo quality, clinical pregnancy, ongoing pregnancy, and live birth rates. These findings suggest that while AOA may enhance early laboratory outcomes, its impact on clinically meaningful reproductive endpoints remains limited. Therefore, further adequately powered randomized studies are required to clarify the efficacy and safety of AOA.

Indexed as

Infertility, FemaleOocytesOvulation InductionSperm Injections, IntracytoplasmicAdultCalcium IonophoresFemaleFertilization in VitroHumansOvarian ReservePregnancyPregnancy RateProspective StudiesCalcium IonophoresChemical activationElectrical activationFertilizationPoor responders

Identifiers

PMID42463955
PMCPMC13654886

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.