Evaluating the Effectiveness of Assisted Oocyte Activation in ICSI: Pairwise Meta-Analyses and Systematic Evidence Evaluation.

IF 4.7 1区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY Bjog-An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Pub Date : 2025-01-30 DOI:10.1111/1471-0528.18085
Mohamed Fawzy, Mohamad AlaaEldein Elsuity, Yasmin Magdi, Mosab Mahmod Rashwan, Mostafa Ali Gad, Nehal Adel, Mai Emad, Dina Ibrahem, Sara El-Gezeiry, Ahmed Etman, Niveen Shaker Ahmed, Tamer Abdelhamed, Ahmed El-Damen, Ali Mahran, Gamal I Serour, Mohamed Y Soliman
{"title":"Evaluating the Effectiveness of Assisted Oocyte Activation in ICSI: Pairwise Meta-Analyses and Systematic Evidence Evaluation.","authors":"Mohamed Fawzy, Mohamad AlaaEldein Elsuity, Yasmin Magdi, Mosab Mahmod Rashwan, Mostafa Ali Gad, Nehal Adel, Mai Emad, Dina Ibrahem, Sara El-Gezeiry, Ahmed Etman, Niveen Shaker Ahmed, Tamer Abdelhamed, Ahmed El-Damen, Ali Mahran, Gamal I Serour, Mohamed Y Soliman","doi":"10.1111/1471-0528.18085","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Artificial oocyte activation (AOA) is used to improve fertilisation rates in intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To assess the effectiveness of AOA on fertilisation, embryo development, and clinical outcomes, including live birth.</p><p><strong>Search strategy: </strong>We searched PubMed, Cochrane, and Scopus from January 1990 to March 2024 using terms related to 'artificial oocyte activation' and 'ICSI.'</p><p><strong>Selection criteria: </strong>Study designs included randomised trials (RCTs), quasi-experimental, cohort, and case-control studies that evaluated AOA's effects on ICSI outcomes, provided quantitative data and were published in English.</p><p><strong>Data collection and analysis: </strong>Reviewers independently performed data extraction using a standardised form. Study quality was appraised using Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Checklists. Meta-analyses employed a random-effects model, and evidence was classified using a comprehensive numerical framework.</p><p><strong>Main results: </strong>We included 45 studies covering 56 787 mature oocytes, 7463 women for clinical pregnancies, and 7063 women for live births. AOA showed potential in increasing fertilisation rates in patients with a history of low or absent fertilisation but did not enhance embryo development or clinical outcomes. This effect diminished when excluding low-quality studies or focusing solely on RCTs. In other patient groups, AOA showed limited or nonsignificant benefits.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Applying comprehensive evidence assessment, AOA showed potential in improving fertilisation rates in patients with fertilisation problems but no benefits for embryo development or live birth rates. This underscores the critical importance of rigorous evidence credibility in informing clinical practice in assisted conception.</p>","PeriodicalId":50729,"journal":{"name":"Bjog-An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bjog-An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/1471-0528.18085","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Artificial oocyte activation (AOA) is used to improve fertilisation rates in intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles.

Objectives: To assess the effectiveness of AOA on fertilisation, embryo development, and clinical outcomes, including live birth.

Search strategy: We searched PubMed, Cochrane, and Scopus from January 1990 to March 2024 using terms related to 'artificial oocyte activation' and 'ICSI.'

Selection criteria: Study designs included randomised trials (RCTs), quasi-experimental, cohort, and case-control studies that evaluated AOA's effects on ICSI outcomes, provided quantitative data and were published in English.

Data collection and analysis: Reviewers independently performed data extraction using a standardised form. Study quality was appraised using Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Checklists. Meta-analyses employed a random-effects model, and evidence was classified using a comprehensive numerical framework.

Main results: We included 45 studies covering 56 787 mature oocytes, 7463 women for clinical pregnancies, and 7063 women for live births. AOA showed potential in increasing fertilisation rates in patients with a history of low or absent fertilisation but did not enhance embryo development or clinical outcomes. This effect diminished when excluding low-quality studies or focusing solely on RCTs. In other patient groups, AOA showed limited or nonsignificant benefits.

Conclusions: Applying comprehensive evidence assessment, AOA showed potential in improving fertilisation rates in patients with fertilisation problems but no benefits for embryo development or live birth rates. This underscores the critical importance of rigorous evidence credibility in informing clinical practice in assisted conception.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
10.90
自引率
5.20%
发文量
345
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: BJOG is an editorially independent publication owned by the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG). The Journal publishes original, peer-reviewed work in all areas of obstetrics and gynaecology, including contraception, urogynaecology, fertility, oncology and clinical practice. Its aim is to publish the highest quality medical research in women''s health, worldwide.
期刊最新文献
Issue Information Evaluating the Effectiveness of Assisted Oocyte Activation in ICSI: Pairwise Meta-Analyses and Systematic Evidence Evaluation. Factors Influencing Pregnant Women's Participation in Randomised Clinical Trials in India: A Qualitative Study. Author Reply. Issue Information
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1