Statements in which the resource exists.
SubjectPredicateObjectContext
pubmed-article:12019615rdf:typepubmed:Citationlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0324143lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:12019615lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0205145lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:12019615lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0029045lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:12019615lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0040223lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:12019615lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C1280500lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:12019615lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0021586lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:12019615lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C1547239lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:12019615lifeskim:mentionsumls-concept:C0404268lld:lifeskim
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:issue5lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:dateCreated2002-5-21lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:abstractTextThe objective of the study was to compare embryo development rates after transfer of oocytes collected 22 or 33 h after hCG injection into recipients inseminated within the uterus or the oviduct. Oocytes were collected at approximately 22 or 33 h after hCG injections and incubated for approximately 16 or 1.5 h, respectively, before transfer. Intrauterine inseminations using 1 x 10(9) progressively motile sperm were done approximately 12 h before and 2 h after transfer. For intraoviductal inseminations (gamete intrafallopian transfer [GIFT]), semen was centrifuged through a Percoll gradient, and 200,000 progressively motile sperm were transferred with oocytes into the oviduct. Time of oocyte collection (22 or 33 h) after hCG injection did not affect embryo development rates (17/25, 68%, vs 12/23, 52%, respectively; P = 0.40). When results from oocyte collections at 22 and 33 h after hCG were combined, oocyte transfer with intraoviductal vs intrauterine insemination resulted in similar (P = 0.70) embryo development rates (12/22, 55%, and 17/26, 65%, respectively). However, the interaction between time of oocyte collection and site of insemination tended to be significant (P = 0.09), suggesting that GIFT using oocytes collected at 33 h after hCG may not be as effective as using oocytes collected at 22 h after hCG. Because intraoviductal insemination requires a low number of sperm, GIFT could be used in cases of male subfertility, frozen semen, or sexed sperm.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:languageenglld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:journalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:citationSubsetIMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:chemicalhttp://linkedlifedata.com/r...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:statusMEDLINElld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:monthMaylld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:issn0021-8812lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:authorpubmed-author:SeidelG EGEJrlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:authorpubmed-author:SquiresE LELlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:authorpubmed-author:CarnevaleE...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:authorpubmed-author:MaclellanL...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:authorpubmed-author:Coutinho da...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:issnTypePrintlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:volume80lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:ownerNLMlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:authorsCompleteYlld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:pagination1275-9lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:dateRevised2006-11-15lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:12019615...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:12019615...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:12019615...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:12019615...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:12019615...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:12019615...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:12019615...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:12019615...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:12019615...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:12019615...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:12019615...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:12019615...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:12019615...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:12019615...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:meshHeadingpubmed-meshheading:12019615...lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:year2002lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:articleTitleEffect of time of oocyte collection and site of insemination on oocyte transfer in mares.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:affiliationAnimal Reproduction and Biotechnology Laboratory, Colorado State University, Fort Collins 80523, USA.lld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:publicationTypeJournal Articlelld:pubmed
pubmed-article:12019615pubmed:publicationTypeResearch Support, Non-U.S. Gov'tlld:pubmed