Cochrane · systematic review · CD002806

Embryo freezing for preventing ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome

D'Angelo, A, Amso, NN · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2007 · Cochrane Library

Gynaecology and FertilityAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
6
current version
GRADE rated
6
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 1 · 16.7%Low 5 · 83.3%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%

Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.

Questions and results

Cryopreservation compared to fresh embryos transfer for preventing ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome

Population: patients with risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome
3 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Moderate and or severe OHSS
Cryopreservation vs fresh embryos transfer
OR 0.12 [0.01, 2.29]1 study · 125 participantsLow
Downgraded: risk of bias
Clinical pregnancies
Cryopreservation vs fresh embryos transfer
OR 1.08 [0.54, 2.19]1 study · 125 participantsLow
Downgraded: risk of bias
Number of livebirths (livebirth rate)
Cryopreservation vs fresh embryos transfer
OR 1.03 [0.5, 2.12]1 study · 125 participantsLow
Downgraded: risk of bias

Cryopreservation compared to intra‐venous albumin for preventing ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome

Population: patients with risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome
3 questions
OutcomeEffectEvidenceStatus / GRADE
Moderate and or severe OHSS
Cryopreservation vs intra‐venous albumin
OR 5.33 [0.51, 56.24]1 study · 26 participantsVery low
Downgraded: risk of bias
Nil and or mild OHSS
Cryopreservation vs intra‐venous albumin
OR 0.38 [0.08, 1.9]1 study · 26 participantsLow
Downgraded: risk of bias
Clinical pregnancies
Cryopreservation vs intra‐venous albumin
OR 0.06 [0, 1.17]1 study · 26 participantsLow
Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision