SynthesisFrontiers in endocrinology2026
Oocyte maturation triggering in high responders in IVF treatment: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.
Synthesis in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2026. 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.
- Empty Follicle Syndrome: Current Therapeutic Approaches and the Role of Triggering Agents in Assisted Reproductive Technology.Medical sciences (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The aim of this study was to compare and rank the efficacy and safety of four final oocyte maturation trigger strategies-human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG), gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa), dual, and double trigger-in predicted high responders undergoing Methods: A systematic search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, clinical trial registries, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews was conducted through December 2024. Eligible studies were randomized controlled trials (RCTs) including high responders, defined by elevated antral follicle count, anti-Müllerian hormone, or estradiol levels. Studies using GnRHa triggers followed by fresh embryo transfer were included only if intensive luteal phase support was provided. Oocyte donation cycles, quasi-randomized designs, and trials lacking outcome data were excluded. Data extraction and risk of bias assessment were independently conducted by two reviewers. Study integrity was evaluated using the TRACT checklist. NMA was performed in STATA (v16), and treatment ranking was based on Surface Under the Cumulative Ranking curve (SUCRA). Results: Seven high-quality RCTs comprising 632 women were included. There were no significant differences in the number of oocytes retrieved between GnRHa and hCG triggers (mean difference [MD] 1.08, 95% CI -1.06 to 3.22), dual and hCG (MD 0.61, 95% CI -1.53 to 2.74), or GnRHa and dual (MD 1.08, 95% CI -1.06 to 3.22). Similarly, there were no significant differences in mature oocyte yield, clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), or miscarriage rate across comparisons. However, GnRHa trigger significantly reduced the risk of moderate to severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) compared with hCG (RR 0.23, 95% CI 0.07-0.82). There were no significant differences in OHSS risk between dual and hCG (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.05-1.64) or between GnRHa and dual (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.05-1.64). Conclusion: GnRHa, hCG, and dual triggers demonstrate similar efficacy in terms of oocyte yield, maturity, and clinical pregnancy rates in predicted high responders. The GnRHa trigger, however, offers a superior safety profile by significantly lowering the risk of OHSS. Larger multicenter RCTs are required to evaluate live birth outcomes and the potential role of the double trigger in this population. Systematic review registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/, identifier CRD42022351423.
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.