ICSI does not offer any benefit over conventional IVF across different ovarian response categories in non-male factor infertility: a European multicenter analysis

Observational OA: closed
⚙ AI-generated summary by qwen3.7-flash, 2026-09-06 ⓘ

This European multicenter analysis found no significant difference in fertilization, embryo utilization, or live birth rates between ICSI and IVF for non-male factor infertility across all ovarian response categories.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

⚙ AI-generated deep summary by qwen3.7-flash, 2026-10-27 · read from full text ⓘ

This correction note addresses two specific errors found in a previously published European multicenter analysis comparing intracytoplasmic sperm injection and conventional in vitro fertilization for non-male factor infertility. The first error involved a transposition of patient group labels within the results section describing high ovarian responders, which has been corrected to accurately reflect live birth rates for ICSI versus IVF patients. The second mistake concerned an incorrect transformation of percentage data from the original table into Figure 3b, which has also been rectified in this update. This paper does not explicitly discuss endometriosis or adenomyosis; it was included in the corpus via a keyword match in the upstream search index.

Read from the paper's body, not the abstract. Not a substitute for reading the paper. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

PURPOSE: To evaluate whether ICSI offers any benefit compared with IVF in different ovarian response categories in case of non-male factor infertility. METHODS: This is a retrospective multicenter analysis using individual patient data, conducted in 15 tertiary referral hospitals in Europe (1 center in Belgium and 14 in Spain). The study included the first cycle of all patients undergoing ovarian stimulation for IVF or ICSI in a GnRH antagonist protocol. Only patients having either IVF or ICSI for non-male factor infertility were included. Patients were divided into 4 groups based on their ovarian response as follows: group A, poor responders (1-3 oocytes); group B, suboptimal responders (4-9 oocytes); group C, normal responders (10-15 oocytes); group D, high responders (> 15 oocytes). RESULTS: In total, 4891 patients were analyzed, of whom 4227 underwent ICSI and 664 IVF. There was no significant difference for the insemination method (ICSI vs. IVF) used among the different ovarian response categories: 87% vs. 13%, 87% vs. 13%, 86% vs. 14%, 84% vs. 16%, for groups A, B, C, and D, respectively, p value = 0.35. Mean fertilization rates and embryo utilization rates were comparable between IVF and ICSI in the whole cohort. Fresh and cumulative LBR did not differ significantly for IVF and ICSI in poor, suboptimal, normal, and high responders. CONCLUSION: There is no advantage of ICSI over IVF as insemination method for non-male factor infertility, irrespective of the ovarian response. The number of oocytes retrieved has no value for the selection of the insemination procedure in case of non-male infertility.
Full text 880 characters · extracted from oa-html · click to expand
Correction to: Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 10.1007/s10815-019-01563-1 The original article unfortunately contained 2 mistakes. 1) In the Result section of high responders in the main text, “Fresh and cumulative LBR did not differ significantly for IVF and ICSI patients (145/468 (31%) vs. 32/87 (36.7%) and 287/468 (61.3%) vs. 52/87 (59.8%), p value = 0.3 and 0.8, respectively))” should be “Fresh and cumulative LBR did not differ significantly for ICSI and IVF patients .........” . 2) There was a wrong transformation of percentages for fresh and cumulative LBR (from the Table to Fig. 3b). Please see below the revised Fig. 3. Footnotes The online version of the original article can be found at 10.1007/s10815-019-01563-1 Publisher’s note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

⚙ Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-html ⓘ

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Condition tags

infertility

MeSH descriptors

Fertilization in Vitro Infertility Oocytes Sperm Injections, Intracytoplasmic Adult Birth Rate Europe Europe Female Fertilization in Vitro Humans Infertility Infertility Male Oocyte Retrieval Oocyte Retrieval Oocytes Oocytes Ovary Ovary

Citation neighborhood (no data yet)

We don't have any in-corpus citations linked to this paper yet. The paper's references may be in our DB but unresolved to ``paper_id`` (resolution happens at ingest when the cited DOI matches a row we already have). Run the cross-source citation reconcile pass to retry.

Source provenance

europepmc
last seen: 2026-10-25T09:32:14.900964+00:00
pubmed
last seen: 2026-10-08T21:25:22.513924+00:00
unpaywall
last seen: 2026-10-27T06:37:41.825712+00:00