<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<crossref_result xmlns="http://www.crossref.org/qrschema/3.0" version="3.0" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.crossref.org/qrschema/3.0 http://www.crossref.org/schemas/crossref_query_output3.0.xsd">
  <query_result>
    <head>
      <doi_batch_id>none</doi_batch_id>
    </head>
    <body>
      <query status="resolved">
        <doi type="journal_article">10.18502/ijrm.v17i7.4859</doi>
        <crm-item name="publisher-name" type="string">Knowledge E DMCC</crm-item>
        <crm-item name="prefix-name" type="string">Knowledge E DMCC</crm-item>
        <crm-item name="member-id" type="number">7770</crm-item>
        <crm-item name="citation-id" type="number">108782998</crm-item>
        <crm-item name="journal-id" type="number">313405</crm-item>
        <crm-item name="deposit-timestamp" type="number">1737711907</crm-item>
        <crm-item name="owner-prefix" type="string">10.18502</crm-item>
        <crm-item name="last-update" type="date">2025-01-24T04:45:22Z</crm-item>
        <crm-item name="created" type="date">2019-08-01T06:07:08Z</crm-item>
        <crm-item name="citedby-count" type="number">1</crm-item>
        <doi_record>
          <crossref xmlns="http://www.crossref.org/xschema/1.1" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.crossref.org/xschema/1.1 http://doi.crossref.org/schemas/unixref1.1.xsd">
            <journal>
              <journal_metadata>
                <full_title>International Journal of Reproductive BioMedicine (IJRM)</full_title>
                <abbrev_title>IJRM</abbrev_title>
                <issn media_type="electronic">2476-3772</issn>
                <issn media_type="print">2476-4108</issn>
              </journal_metadata>
              <journal_issue>
                <publication_date media_type="online">
                  <month>07</month>
                  <day>31</day>
                  <year>2019</year>
                </publication_date>
                <journal_volume>
                  <volume>17</volume>
                </journal_volume>
                <issue>7</issue>
              </journal_issue>
              <journal_article xmlns:jats="http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/JATS1" publication_type="full_text" metadata_distribution_opts="any">
                <titles>
                  <title>The effect of catheter rotation during its withdrawal on frozen thawed embryo-transfer cycles outcomes: A Case-control study</title>
                </titles>
                <contributors>
                  <person_name contributor_role="author" sequence="first">
                    <given_name>Maryam</given_name>
                    <surname>Eftekhar</surname>
                  </person_name>
                  <person_name contributor_role="author" sequence="additional">
                    <given_name>Lida</given_name>
                    <surname>Saeed</surname>
                  </person_name>
                  <person_name contributor_role="author" sequence="additional">
                    <given_name>Masrooreh</given_name>
                    <surname>Hoseini</surname>
                  </person_name>
                </contributors>
                <jats:abstract>
                  <jats:p>Background: Embryo transfer (ET) is the last and the most clinical process in assisted reproductive technology cycle. It has been suggested that cervical mucus interacts with an adequate embryo transfer in different ways. A few studies showed that catheter rotation could discharge mucus entrapped in the embryo to neutralize embryo displacement.&#xD;
Objective: The aim of this present study was to compare the outcome of frozen embryo transfer (FET) based on catheter rotation during withdrawal.&#xD;
Materials and Methods: In this case-control study, the clinical documents of 240 women who experienced frozen embryo transfer cycles were reviewed. The subjects were divided into two groups (n = 120/each), including A) the rotation treatment group (360°) that underwent ET using catheter rotation and B) the control group including the subjects who experienced ET with no catheter rotation. Clinical and chemical pregnancies and implantation rates were compared between two groups.&#xD;
Results: Results showed that there is no significant difference between the basic clinical and demographic features of both groups (p &gt; 0.05). A significant difference was observed in terms of the rate of chemical pregnancy between groups (21.7% vs 43.3%, p = 0.001 respectively). In addition, the rate of clinical pregnancy was significantly higher in study group than the control (33.35% vs 14.2%, p = 0.002, respectively).&#xD;
Conclusion: Our results demonstrated that catheter rotation during withdrawal increased the implantation rate and clinical pregnancy.</jats:p>
                </jats:abstract>
                <publication_date media_type="online">
                  <month>07</month>
                  <day>25</day>
                  <year>2019</year>
                </publication_date>
                <pages>
                  <first_page>481</first_page>
                  <last_page>486</last_page>
                </pages>
                <crossmark>
                  <crossmark_version>1</crossmark_version>
                  <crossmark_policy>https://doi.org/10.18502/knecrossmarkpolicy</crossmark_policy>
                  <crossmark_domains>
                    <crossmark_domain>
                      <domain>knepublishing.com</domain>
                    </crossmark_domain>
                  </crossmark_domains>
                  <crossmark_domain_exclusive>true</crossmark_domain_exclusive>
                  <custom_metadata />
                </crossmark>
                <doi_data>
                  <doi>10.18502/ijrm.v17i7.4859</doi>
                  <resource>https://knepublishing.com/index.php/ijrm/article/view/483%E2%80%93488</resource>
                  <collection property="crawler-based">
                    <item crawler="iParadigms">
                      <resource>https://knepublishing.com/index.php/ijrm/article/download/483%E2%80%93488/9647</resource>
                    </item>
                  </collection>
                  <collection property="text-mining">
                    <item>
                      <resource mime_type="application/pdf">https://knepublishing.com/index.php/ijrm/article/download/483%E2%80%93488/9647</resource>
                    </item>
                    <item>
                      <resource mime_type="application/xml">https://knepublishing.com/index.php/ijrm/article/download/483%E2%80%93488/9665</resource>
                    </item>
                  </collection>
                  <collection property="list-based" multi-resolution="unlock">
                    <item label="UNIVERSITY" setbyID="knowe">
                      <resource>http://journals.ssu.ac.ir/ijrmnew/article-1-1580-en.html</resource>
                    </item>
                    <item label="PUBLISHER" setbyID="knowe">
                      <resource>https://knepublishing.com/index.php/ijrm/article/view/4859</resource>
                    </item>
                  </collection>
                </doi_data>
                <citation_list>
                  <citation key="14363">
                    <doi provider="crossref">10.1201/9781351228244</doi>
                    <unstructured_citation>Gardner DK, Weissman A, Howles CM, Shoham Z. Textbook of assisted reproductive techniques: laboratory and clinical perspectives. USA: Informa Healthcare; 2016.</unstructured_citation>
                  </citation>
                  <citation key="14364">
                    <unstructured_citation>Neelam B, Mohanlal S, Namita K, Soni RR. Embryo transfer technic-role of transfer catheter. J Obstet Gynecol India 2005; 55: 146–150.</unstructured_citation>
                  </citation>
                  <citation key="14365">
                    <unstructured_citation>Yayla Abide C, Ozkaya E, Sanverdi I, Bostanc</unstructured_citation>
                  </citation>
                  <citation key="14366">
                    <doi provider="crossref">10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a138690</doi>
                    <unstructured_citation>Mansour RT, Aboulghar MA, Serour Gl, Amin YM. Dummy embryo transfer using methylene blue dye. Hum Reprod 1994; 9: 1257–1259.</unstructured_citation>
                  </citation>
                  <citation key="14367">
                    <unstructured_citation>Kim CS, Berkley BB, Abraham WM, Wanner A. A micro double capillary method for rheologic measurements of</unstructured_citation>
                  </citation>
                  <citation key="14368">
                    <unstructured_citation>lower airway secretions. Bull Eur Physiopathol Respir 1982; 18: 915–927.</unstructured_citation>
                  </citation>
                  <citation key="14369">
                    <doi provider="crossref">10.1021/ac0518046</doi>
                    <unstructured_citation>Srivastava N, Burns MA. Analysis of non-Newtonian liquids using a microfluidic capillary viscometer. Anal Chem 2006; 78: 1690–1696.</unstructured_citation>
                  </citation>
                  <citation key="14370">
                    <doi provider="crossref">10.1097/01.gco.0000169107.08000.dd</doi>
                    <unstructured_citation>Sallam HN. Embryo transfer: factors involved in optimizing the success. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2005; 17: 289– 298.</unstructured_citation>
                  </citation>
                  <citation key="14371">
                    <doi provider="crossref">10.1016/S1472-6483(10)60872-3</doi>
                    <unstructured_citation>Eskandar MA, Abou-Setta AM, El-Amin M, Almushait MA, Sobande AA. Removal of cervical mucus prior to embryo transfer improves pregnancy rates in women undergoing assisted reproduction. Reprod Biomed Online 2007; 14: 308–313.</unstructured_citation>
                  </citation>
                  <citation key="14372">
                    <unstructured_citation>Aflatoonian A, Asgharnia M, Tabibnejad N. [Effect of cervical mucus aspiration with insulin syringe on pregnancy rate in ART cycles.] J Rafsanjan Univ Med Sci Health Ser 2005; 4: 65–71. (in Persian)</unstructured_citation>
                  </citation>
                  <citation key="14373">
                    <doi provider="crossref">10.1111/j.1479-828X.2011.01318.x</doi>
                    <unstructured_citation>Moini A, Kiani K, Bahmanabadi A, Akhoond M, Akhlaghi A. Improvement in pregnancy rate by removal of cervical discharge prior to embryo transfer in ICSI cycles: a randomised clinical trial. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2011;51: 315–320.</unstructured_citation>
                  </citation>
                  <citation key="14374">
                    <unstructured_citation>Rabiee S, Kaboodmehri R, Fallah M, Yavangi M, Sanouei Farimani M. Effect of cervical mucus aspiration before embryo transfer on pregnancy rate. Iran J Reprod Med 2013; 11: 849–850.</unstructured_citation>
                  </citation>
                  <citation key="14375">
                    <doi provider="crossref">10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.01.104</doi>
                    <unstructured_citation>Dasig J, Zhao Q, Shu Y, Reddy V, Gebhardt J, Behr B. IVF outcomes: effects of blood or mucus on the tip of a soft embryo transfer catheter after embryo transfer. Fertil Steril 2011; 95: S26.</unstructured_citation>
                  </citation>
                  <citation key="14376">
                    <doi provider="crossref">10.1007/s10815-007-9146-5</doi>
                    <unstructured_citation>Selman H, Mariani M, Barnocchi N, Mencacci A, Bistoni F, Arena S, et al. Examination of bacterial contamination at the time of embryo transfer, and its impact on the IVF/pregnancy outcome. J Assist Reprod Genet 2007; 24: 395–399.</unstructured_citation>
                  </citation>
                  <citation key="14377">
                    <doi provider="crossref">10.1016/S0015-0282(16)54793-1</doi>
                    <unstructured_citation>Knutzen V, Stratton CJ, Sher G, McNamee PI, Huang TT, Soto-Albors C. Mock embryo transfer in early luteal phase, the cycle before in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer: a descriptive study. Fertil Steril 1992; 57: 156–162.</unstructured_citation>
                  </citation>
                  <citation key="14378">
                    <doi provider="crossref">10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.03.046</doi>
                    <unstructured_citation>Madani T, Ashrafi M, Jahangiri N, Abadi AB, Lankarani N. Improvement of pregnancy rate by modification of embryo transfer technique: a randomized clinical trial. Fertil Steril 2010; 94: 2424–2426.</unstructured_citation>
                  </citation>
                  <citation key="14379">
                    <doi provider="crossref">10.1093/humrep/dev343</doi>
                    <unstructured_citation>Saravelos SH, Wong AW, Chan CP, Kong GW, Cheung LP, Chung CH, et al. Assessment of the embryo flash position and migration with 3D ultrasound within 60 min of embryo transfer. Hum Reprod 2016; 31: 591–596.</unstructured_citation>
                  </citation>
                </citation_list>
              </journal_article>
            </journal>
          </crossref>
        </doi_record>
      </query>
    </body>
  </query_result>
</crossref_result>