Cochrane · systematic review · CD007421
Hyaluronic acid in embryo transfer media for assisted reproductive technologies
Heymann, D, Vidal, L, Or, Y, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2020 · Cochrane Library
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
5
current version
GRADE rated
5
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 0 · 0%Low 2 · 40%Moderate 3 · 60%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
Show all 2 versionsHigh versus low or no hyaluronic acid for assisted reproductive technologies
Population: couples undergoing embryo transfer
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Live birth rate ‐ high vs low or no hyaluronic acid High vs low or no hyaluronic acid | RR 1.21 [1.11, 1.31] | 10 studies · 4066 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias |
Miscarriage rate High vs low or no hyaluronic acid | RR 0.82 [0.67, 1] | 7 studies · 3091 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision, inconsistency |
Clinical pregnancy rate ‐ high vs low or no hyaluronic acid High vs low or no hyaluronic acid | RR 1.16 [1.09, 1.23] | 17 studies · 5247 participants | Moderate Downgraded: inconsistency |
Multiple pregnancy rate High vs low or no hyaluronic acid | RR 1.45 [1.24, 1.7] | 7 studies · 3337 participants | Moderate Downgraded: imprecision |
Adverse event rate High vs low or no hyaluronic acid | RR 0.86 [0.4, 1.84] | 3 studies · 1487 participants | Low Downgraded: imprecision |