Pregnancy following successful accelerated rescue oocyte retrieval following absence of oocytes in primary follicular aspirations: A case report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
RATIONALE: The objective of this study was to present a case of successful oocyte retrieval following a failed oocyte pickup on the same day that led to pregnancy after frozen embryo transfer. PATIENT CONCERNS: A 31-year-old gravida 1 para 1 woman with Von Willebrand disease, presented to our infertility center for secondary infertility for 2 years with known male factor and failed initial oocyte collection. DIAGNOSES: Increasing progesterone, decreasing estradiol, and low luteinizing hormone were signs of a successful ovulation and indicated the need to perform rescue retrieval. INTERVENTIONS: In vitro fertilization, rescue delayed oocyte retrieval, and letrozole stimulated frozen embryo transfer. OUTCOMES: A pregnancy following a frozen embryo transfer after a rescue oocyte retrieval in a stimulated in vitro fertilization cycle. Interpretation of blood tests (estradiol, progesterone, and luteinizing hormone) suggestive of effective ovulation induction with an agonist trigger can be an indication for delayed rescue retrieval. LESSONS: Despite the absence of oocyte after 5 follicular aspiration, healthcare providers should be aware of the value of rescue oocyte collection when endocrine findings suggest an effective ovulation trigger.
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 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 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".