Loading…

The use of follicle flushing during oocyte retrieval in assisted reproductive technologies: a systematic review and meta-analysis

STUDY QUESTION Does follicular flushing during assisted reproductive technologies (ART) improve the number of oocytes retrieved?   SUMMARY ANSWER Follicular flushing during ART does not result in a greater number of oocytes in normal responders. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Despite limited evidence support...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Human reproduction (Oxford) 2012-08, Vol.27 (8), p.2373-2379
Main Authors: Levy, Gary, Hill, Micah J., Ramirez, Christina I., Correa, Luiz, Ryan, Mary E., DeCherney, Alan H., Levens, Eric D., Whitcomb, Brian W.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c450t-1bff0fd3d7dbe8172a6ee2005bd72070948cb123acaa064ea582b7b995c10e693
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c450t-1bff0fd3d7dbe8172a6ee2005bd72070948cb123acaa064ea582b7b995c10e693
container_end_page 2379
container_issue 8
container_start_page 2373
container_title Human reproduction (Oxford)
container_volume 27
creator Levy, Gary
Hill, Micah J.
Ramirez, Christina I.
Correa, Luiz
Ryan, Mary E.
DeCherney, Alan H.
Levens, Eric D.
Whitcomb, Brian W.
description STUDY QUESTION Does follicular flushing during assisted reproductive technologies (ART) improve the number of oocytes retrieved?   SUMMARY ANSWER Follicular flushing during ART does not result in a greater number of oocytes in normal responders. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Despite limited evidence supporting the use of follicular flushing, it continues to be a common procedure in many ART clinics. Prior studies have provided conflicting results regarding the routine use of flushing during oocyte retrieval. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION Systematic review and meta-analysis of 518 patients who participated in 6 randomized trials over 20 years. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS Literature searches were conducted to retrieve randomized controlled trials on follicle or ovarian flushing in ART. Databases searched included PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Database of Clinical Trials (CENTRAL). Six trials that included 518 subjects matched the inclusion criteria. Studies included were limited to trials that were published, randomized trials comparing oocyte retrieval with a single-lumen pick-up needle versus follicle flushing after direct aspiration with a multi-channel oocyte pick-up needle in ART patients. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE In each of the trials, measures of the oocyte yield (oocytes retrieved divided by follicles aspirated), total oocytes retrieved, fertilization or pregnancy were not different when comparing direct aspiration with follicle flushing. Four trials reported a higher operative time with follicle flushing. Results of the meta-analysis indicated no significant differences in the oocytes retrieved [weighted mean difference: 0.07, 95% confidence interval (CI): −0.13 to 0.29] or the oocyte yield (odds ratio: 1.06, 95% CI: 0.95–1.18) between the non-flushing and flushing groups. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION All trials featured an open label design and the majority of patients in this meta-analysis were normal responders. The applications of these results to poor responders, patients undergoing natural cycle ART or minimal stimulation ART should be made with caution. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS Follicle flushing does not improve ART outcomes in normal-responding patients and should not be performed. This meta-analysis should solidify this recommendation as it includes the largest trial published on the subject and is consistent with a recently published Cochrane review. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) This wo
doi_str_mv 10.1093/humrep/des174
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_3398677</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><oup_id>10.1093/humrep/des174</oup_id><sourcerecordid>1027040947</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c450t-1bff0fd3d7dbe8172a6ee2005bd72070948cb123acaa064ea582b7b995c10e693</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkb2P1DAQxS0E4paDkha5QaIJZzuJnVAgoRNf0kk0R21N7MnGyIkX29nTlvzneLXLHVRUM5r56b0nPUJecvaWs76-mtY54u7KYuKqeUQ2vJGsEnXLHpMNE7KrOJf8gjxL6QdjZe3kU3IhhGxU07IN-XU7IV0T0jDSMXjvjEc6-jVNbtlSu8bjCMEcMtKIOTrcg6duoZCSSxltue5isKvJbo80o5mW4MPWYXpHgaZDYWbIzhRu7_COwmLpjBkqWMAfisZz8mQEn_DFeV6S758-3l5_qW6-ff56_eGmMiVorvgwjmy0tVV2wI4rARJRMNYOVgmmWN90ZuCiBgPAZIPQdmJQQ9-3hjOUfX1J3p90d-swozW45Ahe76KbIR50AKf__Sxu0tuw13Xdd1KpIvDmLBDDzxVT1rNLBr2HBcOaNGdCsaYEOaLVCTUxpBRxvLfhTB9r06fa9Km2wr_6O9s9_aenArw-A5AM-DHCYlx64CRvasn7h4xh3f3H8zcMqLUZ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1027040947</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The use of follicle flushing during oocyte retrieval in assisted reproductive technologies: a systematic review and meta-analysis</title><source>Oxford Journals Online</source><creator>Levy, Gary ; Hill, Micah J. ; Ramirez, Christina I. ; Correa, Luiz ; Ryan, Mary E. ; DeCherney, Alan H. ; Levens, Eric D. ; Whitcomb, Brian W.</creator><creatorcontrib>Levy, Gary ; Hill, Micah J. ; Ramirez, Christina I. ; Correa, Luiz ; Ryan, Mary E. ; DeCherney, Alan H. ; Levens, Eric D. ; Whitcomb, Brian W.</creatorcontrib><description>STUDY QUESTION Does follicular flushing during assisted reproductive technologies (ART) improve the number of oocytes retrieved?   SUMMARY ANSWER Follicular flushing during ART does not result in a greater number of oocytes in normal responders. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Despite limited evidence supporting the use of follicular flushing, it continues to be a common procedure in many ART clinics. Prior studies have provided conflicting results regarding the routine use of flushing during oocyte retrieval. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION Systematic review and meta-analysis of 518 patients who participated in 6 randomized trials over 20 years. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS Literature searches were conducted to retrieve randomized controlled trials on follicle or ovarian flushing in ART. Databases searched included PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Database of Clinical Trials (CENTRAL). Six trials that included 518 subjects matched the inclusion criteria. Studies included were limited to trials that were published, randomized trials comparing oocyte retrieval with a single-lumen pick-up needle versus follicle flushing after direct aspiration with a multi-channel oocyte pick-up needle in ART patients. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE In each of the trials, measures of the oocyte yield (oocytes retrieved divided by follicles aspirated), total oocytes retrieved, fertilization or pregnancy were not different when comparing direct aspiration with follicle flushing. Four trials reported a higher operative time with follicle flushing. Results of the meta-analysis indicated no significant differences in the oocytes retrieved [weighted mean difference: 0.07, 95% confidence interval (CI): −0.13 to 0.29] or the oocyte yield (odds ratio: 1.06, 95% CI: 0.95–1.18) between the non-flushing and flushing groups. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION All trials featured an open label design and the majority of patients in this meta-analysis were normal responders. The applications of these results to poor responders, patients undergoing natural cycle ART or minimal stimulation ART should be made with caution. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS Follicle flushing does not improve ART outcomes in normal-responding patients and should not be performed. This meta-analysis should solidify this recommendation as it includes the largest trial published on the subject and is consistent with a recently published Cochrane review. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) This work was supported, in part, by the Program in Reproductive and Adult Endocrinology, NICHD, NIH, Bethesda, MD. The authors have no competing interests to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER N/A.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0268-1161</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1460-2350</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/humrep/des174</identifier><identifier>PMID: 22647450</identifier><identifier>CODEN: HUREEE</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Oxford: Oxford University Press</publisher><subject>Adult ; Biological and medical sciences ; Databases, Factual ; Female ; Fertilization ; Fertilization in Vitro - methods ; Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics ; Humans ; Medical sciences ; Oocyte Retrieval - methods ; Oocytes - cytology ; Oocytes - metabolism ; Original ; Ovarian Follicle - pathology ; Pregnancy ; Pregnancy Rate ; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic ; Reproductive Techniques, Assisted ; Risk</subject><ispartof>Human reproduction (Oxford), 2012-08, Vol.27 (8), p.2373-2379</ispartof><rights>The Author 2012. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com 2012</rights><rights>2015 INIST-CNRS</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c450t-1bff0fd3d7dbe8172a6ee2005bd72070948cb123acaa064ea582b7b995c10e693</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c450t-1bff0fd3d7dbe8172a6ee2005bd72070948cb123acaa064ea582b7b995c10e693</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttp://pascal-francis.inist.fr/vibad/index.php?action=getRecordDetail&amp;idt=26143619$$DView record in Pascal Francis$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22647450$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Levy, Gary</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hill, Micah J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ramirez, Christina I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Correa, Luiz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ryan, Mary E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DeCherney, Alan H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Levens, Eric D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Whitcomb, Brian W.</creatorcontrib><title>The use of follicle flushing during oocyte retrieval in assisted reproductive technologies: a systematic review and meta-analysis</title><title>Human reproduction (Oxford)</title><addtitle>Hum Reprod</addtitle><description>STUDY QUESTION Does follicular flushing during assisted reproductive technologies (ART) improve the number of oocytes retrieved?   SUMMARY ANSWER Follicular flushing during ART does not result in a greater number of oocytes in normal responders. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Despite limited evidence supporting the use of follicular flushing, it continues to be a common procedure in many ART clinics. Prior studies have provided conflicting results regarding the routine use of flushing during oocyte retrieval. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION Systematic review and meta-analysis of 518 patients who participated in 6 randomized trials over 20 years. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS Literature searches were conducted to retrieve randomized controlled trials on follicle or ovarian flushing in ART. Databases searched included PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Database of Clinical Trials (CENTRAL). Six trials that included 518 subjects matched the inclusion criteria. Studies included were limited to trials that were published, randomized trials comparing oocyte retrieval with a single-lumen pick-up needle versus follicle flushing after direct aspiration with a multi-channel oocyte pick-up needle in ART patients. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE In each of the trials, measures of the oocyte yield (oocytes retrieved divided by follicles aspirated), total oocytes retrieved, fertilization or pregnancy were not different when comparing direct aspiration with follicle flushing. Four trials reported a higher operative time with follicle flushing. Results of the meta-analysis indicated no significant differences in the oocytes retrieved [weighted mean difference: 0.07, 95% confidence interval (CI): −0.13 to 0.29] or the oocyte yield (odds ratio: 1.06, 95% CI: 0.95–1.18) between the non-flushing and flushing groups. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION All trials featured an open label design and the majority of patients in this meta-analysis were normal responders. The applications of these results to poor responders, patients undergoing natural cycle ART or minimal stimulation ART should be made with caution. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS Follicle flushing does not improve ART outcomes in normal-responding patients and should not be performed. This meta-analysis should solidify this recommendation as it includes the largest trial published on the subject and is consistent with a recently published Cochrane review. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) This work was supported, in part, by the Program in Reproductive and Adult Endocrinology, NICHD, NIH, Bethesda, MD. The authors have no competing interests to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER N/A.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Biological and medical sciences</subject><subject>Databases, Factual</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Fertilization</subject><subject>Fertilization in Vitro - methods</subject><subject>Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Medical sciences</subject><subject>Oocyte Retrieval - methods</subject><subject>Oocytes - cytology</subject><subject>Oocytes - metabolism</subject><subject>Original</subject><subject>Ovarian Follicle - pathology</subject><subject>Pregnancy</subject><subject>Pregnancy Rate</subject><subject>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</subject><subject>Reproductive Techniques, Assisted</subject><subject>Risk</subject><issn>0268-1161</issn><issn>1460-2350</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkb2P1DAQxS0E4paDkha5QaIJZzuJnVAgoRNf0kk0R21N7MnGyIkX29nTlvzneLXLHVRUM5r56b0nPUJecvaWs76-mtY54u7KYuKqeUQ2vJGsEnXLHpMNE7KrOJf8gjxL6QdjZe3kU3IhhGxU07IN-XU7IV0T0jDSMXjvjEc6-jVNbtlSu8bjCMEcMtKIOTrcg6duoZCSSxltue5isKvJbo80o5mW4MPWYXpHgaZDYWbIzhRu7_COwmLpjBkqWMAfisZz8mQEn_DFeV6S758-3l5_qW6-ff56_eGmMiVorvgwjmy0tVV2wI4rARJRMNYOVgmmWN90ZuCiBgPAZIPQdmJQQ9-3hjOUfX1J3p90d-swozW45Ahe76KbIR50AKf__Sxu0tuw13Xdd1KpIvDmLBDDzxVT1rNLBr2HBcOaNGdCsaYEOaLVCTUxpBRxvLfhTB9r06fa9Km2wr_6O9s9_aenArw-A5AM-DHCYlx64CRvasn7h4xh3f3H8zcMqLUZ</recordid><startdate>20120801</startdate><enddate>20120801</enddate><creator>Levy, Gary</creator><creator>Hill, Micah J.</creator><creator>Ramirez, Christina I.</creator><creator>Correa, Luiz</creator><creator>Ryan, Mary E.</creator><creator>DeCherney, Alan H.</creator><creator>Levens, Eric D.</creator><creator>Whitcomb, Brian W.</creator><general>Oxford University Press</general><scope>IQODW</scope><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20120801</creationdate><title>The use of follicle flushing during oocyte retrieval in assisted reproductive technologies: a systematic review and meta-analysis</title><author>Levy, Gary ; Hill, Micah J. ; Ramirez, Christina I. ; Correa, Luiz ; Ryan, Mary E. ; DeCherney, Alan H. ; Levens, Eric D. ; Whitcomb, Brian W.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c450t-1bff0fd3d7dbe8172a6ee2005bd72070948cb123acaa064ea582b7b995c10e693</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Biological and medical sciences</topic><topic>Databases, Factual</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Fertilization</topic><topic>Fertilization in Vitro - methods</topic><topic>Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Medical sciences</topic><topic>Oocyte Retrieval - methods</topic><topic>Oocytes - cytology</topic><topic>Oocytes - metabolism</topic><topic>Original</topic><topic>Ovarian Follicle - pathology</topic><topic>Pregnancy</topic><topic>Pregnancy Rate</topic><topic>Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic</topic><topic>Reproductive Techniques, Assisted</topic><topic>Risk</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Levy, Gary</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hill, Micah J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ramirez, Christina I.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Correa, Luiz</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Ryan, Mary E.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>DeCherney, Alan H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Levens, Eric D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Whitcomb, Brian W.</creatorcontrib><collection>Pascal-Francis</collection><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Human reproduction (Oxford)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Levy, Gary</au><au>Hill, Micah J.</au><au>Ramirez, Christina I.</au><au>Correa, Luiz</au><au>Ryan, Mary E.</au><au>DeCherney, Alan H.</au><au>Levens, Eric D.</au><au>Whitcomb, Brian W.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The use of follicle flushing during oocyte retrieval in assisted reproductive technologies: a systematic review and meta-analysis</atitle><jtitle>Human reproduction (Oxford)</jtitle><addtitle>Hum Reprod</addtitle><date>2012-08-01</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>27</volume><issue>8</issue><spage>2373</spage><epage>2379</epage><pages>2373-2379</pages><issn>0268-1161</issn><eissn>1460-2350</eissn><coden>HUREEE</coden><abstract>STUDY QUESTION Does follicular flushing during assisted reproductive technologies (ART) improve the number of oocytes retrieved?   SUMMARY ANSWER Follicular flushing during ART does not result in a greater number of oocytes in normal responders. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Despite limited evidence supporting the use of follicular flushing, it continues to be a common procedure in many ART clinics. Prior studies have provided conflicting results regarding the routine use of flushing during oocyte retrieval. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION Systematic review and meta-analysis of 518 patients who participated in 6 randomized trials over 20 years. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS Literature searches were conducted to retrieve randomized controlled trials on follicle or ovarian flushing in ART. Databases searched included PubMed, EMBASE, Web of Science and the Cochrane Database of Clinical Trials (CENTRAL). Six trials that included 518 subjects matched the inclusion criteria. Studies included were limited to trials that were published, randomized trials comparing oocyte retrieval with a single-lumen pick-up needle versus follicle flushing after direct aspiration with a multi-channel oocyte pick-up needle in ART patients. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE In each of the trials, measures of the oocyte yield (oocytes retrieved divided by follicles aspirated), total oocytes retrieved, fertilization or pregnancy were not different when comparing direct aspiration with follicle flushing. Four trials reported a higher operative time with follicle flushing. Results of the meta-analysis indicated no significant differences in the oocytes retrieved [weighted mean difference: 0.07, 95% confidence interval (CI): −0.13 to 0.29] or the oocyte yield (odds ratio: 1.06, 95% CI: 0.95–1.18) between the non-flushing and flushing groups. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION All trials featured an open label design and the majority of patients in this meta-analysis were normal responders. The applications of these results to poor responders, patients undergoing natural cycle ART or minimal stimulation ART should be made with caution. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS Follicle flushing does not improve ART outcomes in normal-responding patients and should not be performed. This meta-analysis should solidify this recommendation as it includes the largest trial published on the subject and is consistent with a recently published Cochrane review. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) This work was supported, in part, by the Program in Reproductive and Adult Endocrinology, NICHD, NIH, Bethesda, MD. The authors have no competing interests to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER N/A.</abstract><cop>Oxford</cop><pub>Oxford University Press</pub><pmid>22647450</pmid><doi>10.1093/humrep/des174</doi><tpages>7</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0268-1161
ispartof Human reproduction (Oxford), 2012-08, Vol.27 (8), p.2373-2379
issn 0268-1161
1460-2350
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_3398677
source Oxford Journals Online
subjects Adult
Biological and medical sciences
Databases, Factual
Female
Fertilization
Fertilization in Vitro - methods
Gynecology. Andrology. Obstetrics
Humans
Medical sciences
Oocyte Retrieval - methods
Oocytes - cytology
Oocytes - metabolism
Original
Ovarian Follicle - pathology
Pregnancy
Pregnancy Rate
Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
Reproductive Techniques, Assisted
Risk
title The use of follicle flushing during oocyte retrieval in assisted reproductive technologies: a systematic review and meta-analysis
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-26T05%3A31%3A36IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20use%20of%20follicle%20flushing%20during%20oocyte%20retrieval%20in%20assisted%20reproductive%20technologies:%20a%20systematic%20review%20and%20meta-analysis&rft.jtitle=Human%20reproduction%20(Oxford)&rft.au=Levy,%20Gary&rft.date=2012-08-01&rft.volume=27&rft.issue=8&rft.spage=2373&rft.epage=2379&rft.pages=2373-2379&rft.issn=0268-1161&rft.eissn=1460-2350&rft.coden=HUREEE&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/humrep/des174&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1027040947%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c450t-1bff0fd3d7dbe8172a6ee2005bd72070948cb123acaa064ea582b7b995c10e693%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1027040947&rft_id=info:pmid/22647450&rft_oup_id=10.1093/humrep/des174&rfr_iscdi=true