Assisted hatching on assisted conception (IVF & ICSI)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Failure of implantation and conception may result from an inability of the blastocyst to escape from its outer coat, know as the zona pellucida. In vitro culture conditions and/or advancing maternal age may alter the architecture of the zona pellucida and result in hatching difficulties. Artificial disruption of this coat is known as assisted hatching (AH) has been proposed as a method of improving the success of assisted conception. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether assisted hatching (AH) of embryos facilitates live births and clinical pregnancy and whether it impacts on negative outcomes (such as multiple pregnancy and miscarriage). SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group trials register (1 June 2005), the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (Cochrane Library Issue 2, 2005), MEDLINE (1996 to June 2003), EMBASE (1980 to June 2005) and reference lists of articles. Authors were contacted for missing and/or unpublished data. SELECTION CRITERIA: Trials were identified and independently screened by two reviewers. Randomised controlled trials of AH (mechanical, chemical or laser disruption of the zona pellucida prior to embryo replacement) versus no AH that reported live birth, clinical pregnancy or implantation rates were included. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Qualitative assessments and data extraction were performed independently by two reviewers. Outcomes were extracted as rates and combined using random effects meta-analysis, sensitivity analysis, sub grouping and meta-regression where appropriate. MAIN RESULTS: Twenty-three randomised controlled trials consisting of 2668 women reported on 849 pregnancy outcomes. There was no significant difference in the odds of live births in the AH compared with control groups (6 RCTs; OR 1.19 95% CI 0.81 to 1.73; 163 births from 516 women). Women undergoing assisted hatching were significantly more likely to achieve clinical pregnancy (23 RCTs, OR 1.33, 95% CI 1.12 to 1.57). Miscarriage rates per woman were similar in both groups (12 RCTs OR 1.23 (95% CI 0.73 to 2.05). Multiple pregnancy rates per woman was increased in women who were randomised to AH compared with control women (9 RCTs OR 1.83 (95% CI 1.19 to 2.83). The improvement in clinical pregnancy rate means for a clinic with a success rate of 25% could anticipate improving the CPR to between 28 and 39%, all things being equal. The trials provided insufficient data to investigate the impact of assisted hatching on several important outcomes, including monozygotic twinning, embryo damage, congenital and chromosomal abnormalities, and in vitro blastocyst development. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Despite significantly improved odds of clinical pregnancy, there is insufficient evidence to determine any effect of AH on live birth rates. The increased multiple pregnancy rate is of concern although it likely that with a policy of single embryo transfer this may be lowered. Currently, there is insufficient evidence to recommend assisted hatching.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.009 | 0.037 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.007 | 0.005 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.012 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".