ArticleFertility and sterility2025
Adding short-duration gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist and gonadotropin to natural cycle frozen embryo transfer allowed scheduling of transfer day without compromising live birth.
Article in Fertility and sterility, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectiveTo determine whether there is an association between the type of natural cycle frozen embryo transfer (FET) (scheduled vs. traditional) and live birth outcomes.
designRetrospective cohort of all natural cycle FETs across a single network of fertility clinics in the United States. SUBJECTS: All natural cycle FETs performed in ovulatory patients between January 2019 and April 2022. EXPOSURE: Scheduled natural cycle FET cycles that received a short-duration of gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist (1 ampule/d) with low-dose gonadotropins (75 IU/d) to delay ovulation to enable more flexible scheduling of the FET were compared with cycles without delay.
main outcome measuresLive birth.
resultsThere were a total of 1,087 natural cycle FETs that met the inclusion criteria. The scheduled natural cycle FET protocol was used in 114 (10.5%) of these cycles. The mean age was 35 (interquartile range, 33-38) years. Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy was used in 76.3% (n = 87) of scheduled natural cycle FET cycles and 68.9% (n = 670) of natural cycle FET cycles. The scheduled natural cycle FET group had a significantly higher estradiol level (318 vs. 249 pg/mL) and a lower luteinizing hormone level (5.7 vs. 13.4 mIU/mL) at ovulatory trigger but a comparable peak endometrial thickness (9.4 vs. 9.7 mm) compared with the natural cycle FET group. Overall, there was a significant increase in the rates of positive human chorionic gonadotropin (scheduled natural cycle, 81.6%, vs. natural cycle, 64.3%; relative risk [RR], 1.26 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.15-1.38]) and clinical pregnancy (scheduled natural cycle, 68.4%, vs. natural cycle, 57.1%; RR, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.06-1.38]) in the scheduled natural cycle group. There were a higher proportion of live births in the scheduled natural cycle group; however, this did not reach statistical significance (scheduled natural cycle, 57.0%, vs. natural cycle, 49.4%; RR, 1.15 [95% CI, 0.97-1.36]). A subanalysis of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy cycles yielded similar results.
conclusionA scheduled natural cycle FET protocol using a short duration of gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist along with low-dose gonadotropin add-back did not reduce live birth compared with traditional natural cycle FET cycles. These results suggest that this is an alternative FET protocol that may serve as a viable strategy to provide flexibility in scheduling the day of FET while still allowing a patient to undergo a natural cycle protocol. This protocol modification may enable more clinics to offer natural cycle FET.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.