Implantation Failures: Success of Assisted Hatching with Quarter-Laser Zona Thinning
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: The aim of this prospective and randomized study was to evaluate the efficacy of quarterlaser zona thinning assisted hatching (qLZT-AH) in improving the implantation of embryos in patients with previous implantation failure.Material and Methods: A total of 150 patients with a history of previous implantation failure were treated with intracytoplasmic sperm injection, and allocated into two groups: group I, only one previous implantation failure, and group II, repeated implantation failures.The patients in each group were randomized at the time of embryo transfer into a control group (no qLZT-AH) or experimental group where qLZT-AH was performed.For patients with repeated implantation failures, the implantation rate in those who received laser-thinned embryos was significantly higher (p=0.02)than in those whose embryos were not laser-thinned (10.9 and 2.6% respectively).However, this difference was not observed in patients who presented with only one previous implantation failure.The data demonstrate that qLZT-AH is an effective strategy for improving the implantation of embryos in patients with repeated implantation failures.Keywords: implantation failure, quarter-laser zona thinning and assisted hatching. INTRODUÇÃOO embrião escapa da zona pelúcida (ZP) no estágio de blastocisto, vários dias depois da fertilização, e inicia então o processo de implantação.O processo de eclosão é alcançado mediante uma combinação de expansões e contrações sucessivas do blastocisto, a qual permite a dissolução e rotura da ZP (Stein et al., 1995).O sucesso da eclosão do embrião é a chave do processo de implantação.O afinamento ou abertura da ZP usando métodos quí-
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 | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
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".