ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2025
Optimizing the preparation of thin endometria in frozen-thawed embryo transfer: a retrospective cohort analysis.
Article in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2025. 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: To date, there is no consensus on the optimal endometrial preparation protocol for frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) in patients with a thin endometrium. This study evaluated the effects of different endometrial preparation protocols on pregnancy outcomes in patients undergoing FET cycles. Methods: In this retrospective cohort analysis, we included women with a thin endometrium who underwent FET cycles at the Department of Gynaecology, Affiliated Hospital of Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, from January 1, 2015, to November 30, 2023. Based on the endometrial preparation protocols, the participants were divided into two groups: natural cycle (NC) and hormone replacement therapy (HRT). The primary outcomes measured were clinical pregnancy and live birth rates. Propensity score matching (PSM) was used to mitigate potential disparities between the groups. A comparative analysis of pregnancy outcomes was then performed between the groups. Results: No statistically significant differences were found in pregnancy outcomes between the two groups, even after applying PSM. However, patients with an endometrial thickness of ≤7 mm on the trigger day exhibited significantly higher rates of clinical and biochemical pregnancies when assigned to the HRT group. Conclusions: The HRT protocol is advisable for FET cycles in patients with thin endometrium, particularly when the endometrial thickness is <7 mm on the day of hormonal trigger administration.
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.