Scolaris Content Display Scolaris Content Display

Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews

Número de embriones para transferir después de la fertilización in vitro o de la inyección de esperma intracitoplasmática

Esta versión no es la más reciente

ver la versión actual 21 agosto 2020

Información

DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD003416.pub2Copiar DOI
Base de datos:
  1. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Versión publicada:
  1. 18 octubre 2004see what's new
Tipo:
  1. Intervention
Etapa:
  1. Review
Grupo Editorial Cochrane:

  1. Grupo Cochrane de Ginecología y fertilidad

Copyright:
  1. Copyright © 2009 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Cifras del artículo

Altmetric:

Citado por:

Citado 0 veces por enlace Crossref Cited-by

Contraer

Autores

  • Zabeena Pandian

    Correspondencia a: Obstetrics & Gynaecology, Aberdeen Maternity Hospital, Aberdeen , UK

    [email protected]

    [email protected]

  • Siladitya Bhattacharya

    Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Aberdeen Maternity Hospital, Aberdeen, UK

  • Ozkan Ozturk

    Academic Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University College London Hospitals, London, UK

  • Gamal Serour

    The Egyptian IVF‐ET Center, Al Azhar University , Cairo, Egypt

  • Allan Templeton

    Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, UK

Contributions of authors

Zabeena Pandian: Literature search, data extraction, trial selection, quality assessment, data entry and analysis, writing the first draft of the review.

Siladitya Bhattacharya: Trial selection, quality assessment, responsible for final draft of the review.

Ozturk Ozkan: Development of protocol, literature search.

Gamal Serour: Revising the final draft of the review.

Allan Templeton: Trial selection, revising the final draft of the review.

Sources of support

Internal sources

  • Department of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, University of Aberdeen, UK.

External sources

  • No sources of support supplied

Declaraciones de interés

disponible en

Ninguno

Acknowledgements

MDSG

Version history

Published

Title

Stage

Authors

Version

2020 Aug 21

Number of embryos for transfer following in vitro fertilisation or intra‐cytoplasmic sperm injection

Review

Mohan S Kamath, Mariano Mascarenhas, Richard Kirubakaran, Siladitya Bhattacharya

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD003416.pub5

2013 Jul 29

Number of embryos for transfer following in vitro fertilisation or intra‐cytoplasmic sperm injection

Review

Zabeena Pandian, Jane Marjoribanks, Ozkan Ozturk, Gamal Serour, Siladitya Bhattacharya

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD003416.pub4

2009 Apr 15

Number of embryos for transfer following in‐vitro fertilisation or intra‐cytoplasmic sperm injection

Review

Zabeena Pandian, Siladitya Bhattacharya, Ozkan Ozturk, Gamal Serour, Allan Templeton

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD003416.pub3

2004 Oct 18

Number of embryos for transfer following in‐vitro fertilisation or intra‐cytoplasmic sperm injection

Review

Zabeena Pandian, Siladitya Bhattacharya, Ozkan Ozturk, Gamal Serour, Allan Templeton

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD003416.pub2

2001 Apr 23

Number of embryos for transfer following in‐vitro fertilisation or intra‐cytoplasmic sperm injection

Protocol

Ozkan Ozturk, Siladitya Bhattacharya, Gamal Serour, Allan Templeton

https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD003416

Differences between protocol and review

Sub‐group analyses to assess the efficacy of embryo replacement protocols in different patient groups based on different prognostic characteristics was not performed as planned because most studies did not identify such subgroups. As the data on effectiveness of the interventions compared were insufficient sensitivity analyses were not carried out.

Notes

A new literature search was performed on 30/03/2008 by two reviewers independently (ZP, OO).

Five new trials were identified using the Cochrane search strategy for identifying new trials.Search redesigned and run March 2008 . Three new trials were added to the review.

One trial (Thurin 2004) included blastocyst transfers. Blastocyst transfers were excluded from the data analysed.

Two trials (Thurin2004 and van Montfoort 2006) compared one embryo transfer versus two embryo transfer. One trial (Thurin 2004) also compared one embryo transfer followed by a frozen‐thawed single embryo transfer versus two embryo transfer.

Livebirth rates from Van Montfoort 2006 study was derived from another publication from the same study and appears as van Montfoort* 2006 in the review and references.

A single trial (Heijnen 2006) compared two embryo transfer versus three embryo transfer. The trial also determined the cumulative effect of multiple transfers of two and three embryos.

A trial included in the original review (Lukassen 2002) that compared single embryo transfer versus double embryo was updated and published in 2005. This review has also been updated with this trial.

Two trials (Komori 2004; Mostajeran 2006) that compared three embryo transfer versus two embryo transfer were identified with the new literature search but were excluded as the method of randomisation was unclear in both trials.

The review has been converted into the new Rev man 5 format.

The order of appearance of the comparisons have been changed.

Two additional tables (Table 1 Table 2 ) has been added.

PICO

Population
Intervention
Comparison
Outcome

El uso y la enseñanza del modelo PICO están muy extendidos en el ámbito de la atención sanitaria basada en la evidencia para formular preguntas y estrategias de búsqueda y para caracterizar estudios o metanálisis clínicos. PICO son las siglas en inglés de cuatro posibles componentes de una pregunta de investigación: paciente, población o problema; intervención; comparación; desenlace (outcome).

Para saber más sobre el uso del modelo PICO, puede consultar el Manual Cochrane.