-
BMJ Open Jul 2022Water immersion during labour using a birth pool to achieve relaxation and pain relief during the first and possibly part of the second stage of labour is an... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
Water immersion during labour using a birth pool to achieve relaxation and pain relief during the first and possibly part of the second stage of labour is an increasingly popular care option in several countries. It is used particularly by healthy women who experience a straightforward pregnancy, labour spontaneously at term gestation and plan to give birth in a midwifery led care setting. More women are also choosing to give birth in water. There is debate about the safety of intrapartum water immersion, particularly waterbirth. We synthesised the evidence that compared the effect of water immersion during labour or waterbirth on intrapartum interventions and outcomes to standard care with no water immersion. A secondary objective was to synthesise data relating to clinical care practices and birth settings that women experience who immerse in water and women who do not.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
DATA SOURCES
A search was conducted using CINAHL, Medline, Embase, BioMed Central and PsycINFO during March 2020 and was replicated in May 2021.
ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES
Primary quantitative studies published in 2000 or later, examining maternal or neonatal interventions and outcomes using the birthing pool for labour and/or birth.
DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS
Full-text screening was undertaken independently against inclusion/exclusion criteria in two pairs. Risk of bias assessment included review of seven domains based on the Robbins-I Risk of Bias Tool. All outcomes were summarised using an OR and 95% CI. All calculations were conducted in Comprehensive Meta-Analysis V.3, using the inverse variance method. Results of individual studies were converted to log OR and SE for synthesis. Fixed effects models were used when I was less than 50%, otherwise random effects models were used. The fail-safe N estimates were calculated to determine the number of studies necessary to change the estimates. Begg's test and Egger's regression risk assessed risk of bias across studies. Trim-and-fill analysis was used to estimate the magnitude of effect of the bias. Meta-regression was completed when at least 10 studies provided data for an outcome.
RESULTS
We included 36 studies in the review, (N=157 546 participants). Thirty-one studies were conducted in an obstetric unit setting (n=70 393), four studies were conducted in midwife led settings (n=61 385) and one study was a mixed setting (OU and homebirth) (n=25 768). Midwife led settings included planned home and freestanding midwifery unit (k=1), alongside midwifery units (k=1), planned homebirth (k=1), a freestanding midwifery unit and an alongside midwifery unit (k=1) and an alongside midwifery unit (k=1). For water immersion, 25 studies involved women who planned to have/had a waterbirth (n=151 742), seven involved water immersion for labour only (1901), three studies reported on water immersion during labour and waterbirth (n=3688) and one study was unclear about the timing of water immersion (n=215).Water immersion significantly reduced use of epidural (k=7, n=10 993; OR 0.17 95% CI 0.05 to 0.56), injected opioids (k=8, n=27 391; OR 0.22 95% CI 0.13 to 0.38), episiotomy (k=15, n=36 558; OR 0.16; 95% CI 0.10 to 0.27), maternal pain (k=8, n=1200; OR 0.24 95% CI 0.12 to 0.51) and postpartum haemorrhage (k=15, n=63 891; OR 0.69 95% CI 0.51 to 0.95). There was an increase in maternal satisfaction (k=6, n=4144; OR 1.95 95% CI 1.28 to 2.96) and odds of an intact perineum (k=17, n=59 070; OR 1.48; 95% CI 1.21 to 1.79) with water immersion. Waterbirth was associated with increased odds of cord avulsion (OR 1.94 95% CI 1.30 to 2.88), although the absolute risk remained low (4.3 per 1000 vs 1.3 per 1000). There were no differences in any other identified neonatal outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS
This review endorses previous reviews showing clear benefits resulting from intrapartum water immersion for healthy women and their newborns. While most included studies were conducted in obstetric units, to enable the identification of best practice regarding water immersion, future birthing pool research should integrate factors that are known to influence intrapartum interventions and outcomes. These include maternal parity, the care model, care practices and birth setting.
PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER
CRD42019147001.
Topics: Female; Humans; Immersion; Infant, Newborn; Labor, Obstetric; Natural Childbirth; Pain; Parturition; Pregnancy
PubMed: 35790327
DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-056517 -
Revista Espanola de Salud Publica Jan 2023Caesarean section is a surgical intervention that consists of the extraction of the fetus by abdominal route through the incision in the uterus. Like any surgical... (Review)
Review
OBJECTIVE
Caesarean section is a surgical intervention that consists of the extraction of the fetus by abdominal route through the incision in the uterus. Like any surgical intervention, caesarean section is not exempt from complications and these can be classified as short-term (acute pain) and long-term (adhesions in the scar, lumbar and pelvic pain, intestinal obstruction and ectopic pregnancies). Physiotherapy has different tools to address these complications. The aim of this study was to review the scientific bibliography to know the effects of physiotherapy on patients who have given birth by cesarean section.
METHODS
A search for articles was carried out during the month of December 2021 in the databases: PubMed, Medline, Cinahl, Scopus, PEDro and WOS using the search terms Cesarean Section, Physical Therapy Modalities and Physical therapy. As an inclusion criterion, it was established that the type of study was a Randomized Clinical Trial (RCT).
RESULTS
A total of 280 articles were obtained, of which 9 were selected after applying the eligibility criteria. In them, the most used physiotherapy intervention was electrotherapy, followed by massage therapy and therapeutic exercise. Studies show effects of these forms of physiotherapy, with a determined duration and frequency, with improvements in pain, activities of daily living, comfort level, joint ranges and reduction in the consumption of analgesics.
CONCLUSIONS
Physiotherapy has various modalities with which to attend complications after cesarean section, both in an immediate and a late phase, especially highlighting the reduction of pain.
Topics: Pregnancy; Female; Humans; Spain; Cesarean Section; Physical Therapy Modalities; Exercise Therapy; Pain; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36636805
DOI: No ID Found -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2021Miscarriage, defined as the spontaneous loss of a pregnancy before 24 weeks' gestation, is common with approximately 25% of women experiencing a miscarriage in their... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Miscarriage, defined as the spontaneous loss of a pregnancy before 24 weeks' gestation, is common with approximately 25% of women experiencing a miscarriage in their lifetime, and 15% to 20% of pregnancies ending in a miscarriage. Progesterone has an important role in maintaining a pregnancy, and supplementation with different progestogens in early pregnancy has been attempted to rescue a pregnancy in women with early pregnancy bleeding (threatened miscarriage), and to prevent miscarriages in asymptomatic women who have a history of three or more previous miscarriages (recurrent miscarriage).
OBJECTIVES
To estimate the relative effectiveness and safety profiles for the different progestogen treatments for threatened and recurrent miscarriage, and provide rankings of the available treatments according to their effectiveness, safety, and side-effect profile.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following databases up to 15 December 2020: Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Ovid MEDLINE(R), ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP), and reference lists of retrieved studies.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomised controlled trials assessing the effectiveness or safety of progestogen treatment for the prevention of miscarriage. Cluster-randomised trials were eligible for inclusion. Randomised trials published only as abstracts were eligible if sufficient information could be retrieved. We excluded quasi- and non-randomised trials.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
At least two review authors independently assessed the trials for inclusion and risk of bias, extracted data and checked them for accuracy. We performed pairwise meta-analyses and indirect comparisons, where possible, to determine the relative effects of all available treatments, but due to the limited number of included studies only direct or indirect comparisons were possible. We estimated the relative effects for the primary outcome of live birth and the secondary outcomes including miscarriage (< 24 weeks of gestation), preterm birth (< 37 weeks of gestation), stillbirth, ectopic pregnancy, congenital abnormalities, and adverse drug events. Relative effects for all outcomes are reported separately by the type of miscarriage (threatened and recurrent miscarriage). We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence.
MAIN RESULTS
Our meta-analysis included seven randomised trials involving 5,682 women, and all provided data for meta-analysis. All trials were conducted in hospital settings. Across seven trials (14 treatment arms), the following treatments were used: three arms (21%) used vaginal micronized progesterone; three arms (21%) used dydrogesterone; one arm (7%) used oral micronized progesterone; one arm (7%) used 17-α-hydroxyprogesterone, and six arms (43%) used placebo. Women with threatened miscarriage Based on the relative effects from the pairwise meta-analysis, vaginal micronized progesterone (two trials, 4090 women, risk ratio (RR) 1.03, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.00 to 1.07, high-certainty evidence), and dydrogesterone (one trial, 406 women, RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.07, moderate-certainty evidence) probably make little or no difference to the live birth rate when compared with placebo for women with threatened miscarriage. No data are available to assess the effectiveness of 17-α-hydroxyprogesterone or oral micronized progesterone for the outcome of live birth in women with threatened miscarriage. The pre-specified subgroup analysis by number of previous miscarriages is only possible for vaginal micronized progesterone in women with threatened miscarriage. In women with no previous miscarriages and early pregnancy bleeding, there is probably little or no improvement in the live birth rate (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.04, high-certainty evidence) when treated with vaginal micronized progesterone compared to placebo. However, for women with one or more previous miscarriages and early pregnancy bleeding, vaginal micronized progesterone increases the live birth rate compared to placebo (RR 1.08, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.15, high-certainty evidence). Women with recurrent miscarriage Based on the results from one trial (826 women) vaginal micronized progesterone (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.15, high-certainty evidence) probably makes little or no difference to the live birth rate when compared with placebo for women with recurrent miscarriage. The evidence for dydrogesterone compared with placebo for women with recurrent miscarriage is of very low-certainty evidence, therefore the effects remain unclear. No data are available to assess the effectiveness of 17-α-hydroxyprogesterone or oral micronized progesterone for the outcome of live birth in women with recurrent miscarriage. Additional outcomes All progestogen treatments have a wide range of effects on the other pre-specified outcomes (miscarriage (< 24 weeks of gestation), preterm birth (< 37 weeks of gestation), stillbirth, ectopic pregnancy) in comparison to placebo for both threatened and recurrent miscarriage. Moderate- and low-certainty evidence with a wide range of effects suggests that there is probably no difference in congenital abnormalities and adverse drug events with vaginal micronized progesterone for threatened (congenital abnormalities RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.46, moderate-certainty evidence; adverse drug events RR 1.07 95% CI 0.81 to 1.39, moderate-certainty evidence) or recurrent miscarriage (congenital abnormalities 0.75, 95% CI 0.31 to 1.85, low-certainty evidence; adverse drug events RR 1.46, 95% CI 0.93 to 2.29, moderate-certainty evidence) compared with placebo. There are limited data and very low-certainty evidence on congenital abnormalities and adverse drug events for the other progestogens.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
The overall available evidence suggests that progestogens probably make little or no difference to live birth rate for women with threatened or recurrent miscarriage. However, vaginal micronized progesterone may increase the live birth rate for women with a history of one or more previous miscarriages and early pregnancy bleeding, with likely no difference in adverse events. There is still uncertainty over the effectiveness and safety of alternative progestogen treatments for threatened and recurrent miscarriage.
Topics: Abortion, Habitual; Abortion, Spontaneous; Bias; Birth Rate; Dydrogesterone; Female; Humans; Hydroxyprogesterones; Live Birth; Network Meta-Analysis; Placebos; Pregnancy; Progesterone; Progestins; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Stillbirth
PubMed: 33872382
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD013792.pub2 -
European Journal of Obstetrics,... Sep 2023A Cesarean Scar Pregnancy (CSP) is a variant of uterine ectopic pregnancy defined by full or partial implantation of the gestational sac in the scar of a previous... (Review)
Review
A Cesarean Scar Pregnancy (CSP) is a variant of uterine ectopic pregnancy defined by full or partial implantation of the gestational sac in the scar of a previous cesarean section. The continuous increase of Cesarean Deliveries is causing a parallel increase in CSP and its complications. Considering its high morbidity, the most usual recommendation has been termination of pregnancy in the first trimester; however, several cases progress to viable births. The aim of this systematic review is to evaluate the outcome of CSP managed expectantly and understand whether sonographic signs could correlate to the outcomes. An online-based search of PubMed and Cochrane Library Databases was used to gather studies including women diagnosed with a CSP who were managed expectantly. The description of all cases was analysed by the authors in order to obtain information for each outcome. 47 studies of different types were retrieved, and the gestational outcome was available in 194 patients. Out of these, 39 patients (20,1%) had a miscarriage and 16 (8,3%) suffered foetal death. 50 patients (25,8%) had a term delivery and 81 (41,8%) patients had a preterm birth, out of which 27 (13,9%) delivered before 34 weeks of gestation. In 102 (52,6%) patients, a hysterectomy was performed. Placenta Accreta Spectrum (PAS) was a common disorder among CSP and was linked to a higher rate of complications such as foetal death, preterm birth, hysterectomy, haemorrhagic morbidity and surgical complications. Some of the analysed articles showed that sonographic signs with specific characteristics, such as type II and III CSP classification, Crossover Sign - 1, "In the niche" implantation and lower myometrial thickness could be related to worse outcomes of CSP. This article provides a good understanding of CSP as an entity that, although rare, presents with a high rate of relevant morbidity. It is also understood that pregnancies with confirmed PAS had an even higher rate of morbidity. Some sonographic signs were shown to predict the prognosis of these pregnancies and further investigation is necessary to validate one or more signs so they can be used for a more reliable counselling of women with CSP.
Topics: Pregnancy; Infant, Newborn; Humans; Female; Cesarean Section; Premature Birth; Cicatrix; Watchful Waiting; Pregnancy, Ectopic; Pregnancy Outcome; Placenta Accreta; Fetal Death; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 37421745
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2023.06.030 -
International Journal of Environmental... Mar 2023Novel treatment options for uterine fibroids, such as uterine artery embolization (UAE), ultrasound-guided and magnetic resonance-guided high-intensity focused... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Novel treatment options for uterine fibroids, such as uterine artery embolization (UAE), ultrasound-guided and magnetic resonance-guided high-intensity focused ultrasound (USgHIFU and MRgHIFU), and transcervical radiofrequency ablation (TFA) methods, are widely used in clinical practice. This systematic review and meta-analysis (CRD42022297312) aims to assess and compare reproductive and obstetric outcomes in women who underwent these minimally invasive approaches for uterine fibroids. The search was performed in PubMed, Google Scholar, ScienceDirect, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science and Embase. Risk of bias was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale (NOS) and Cochrane guidelines. The articles were selected to meet the following eligibility criteria: (1) research article, (2) human subject research, and (3) the study of pregnancy outcomes after the treatment of uterine fibroids by either one of three methods-UAE, HIFU, and TFA. The analysis of 25 eligible original articles shows a similar rate of live births for UAE, USgHIFU, MRgHIFU, and TFA (70.8%, 73.5%, 70%, and 75%, respectively). The number of pregnancies varied considerably among these studies, as well as the mean age of pregnant women. However, the results of pregnancy outcomes for TFA are insufficient to draw firm conclusions, since only 24 women became pregnant in these studies, resulting in three live births. The miscarriage rate was highest in the UAE group (19.2%). USgHIFU was associated with a higher rate of placental abnormalities compared to UAE (2.8% vs. 1.6%). The pooled estimate of pregnancies was 17.31% to 44.52% after UAE, 18.69% to 78.53% after HIFU, and 2.09% to 7.63% after TFA. The available evidence confirmed that these minimally invasive uterine-sparing treatment options for uterine fibroids are a good approach for patients wishing to preserve their fertility, with comparable reproductive and obstetric outcomes among the different techniques.
Topics: Female; Humans; Pregnancy; Uterine Neoplasms; Uterine Artery Embolization; Treatment Outcome; Placenta; Leiomyoma
PubMed: 36901489
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph20054480 -
International Journal of Environmental... Apr 2020Pregnancy is a period of complex bio-psychological changes, during which the development of an attachment bond to the fetus takes on a central role. Depressive symptoms... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Pregnancy is a period of complex bio-psychological changes, during which the development of an attachment bond to the fetus takes on a central role. Depressive symptoms are common during this period. Both symptoms of depression and low levels of prenatal attachment are related to negative outcomes in caregivers and infants. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement, this systematic review analyzes and systematizes 41 studies concerning the association between prenatal attachment and perinatal depression. The majority of the studies reported a significant association between the two. Specifically, prenatal depressive symptoms were found to be negatively associated with prenatal attachment. Furthermore, lower levels of prenatal attachment were related to higher postnatal depressive symptoms, although fewer studies assessed this association. While these results were found across different populations, conflicting findings emerged, suggesting they should be interpreted with caution, particularly in male samples and in non-normative pregnancies (e.g., high-risk pregnancies, medically assisted pregnancies, and pregnancies with previous perinatal losses). These results are clinically important for the perinatal screening process and for implementing preventive and treatment programs. However, future studies are needed to further confirm and generalize these results.
Topics: Depression; Depression, Postpartum; Depressive Disorder; Female; Fetus; Humans; Infant; Male; Mother-Child Relations; Mothers; Pregnancy
PubMed: 32290590
DOI: 10.3390/ijerph17082644 -
Atencion Primaria 2019To assess the effectiveness of the interventions to prevent a pregnancy in adolescence.
OBJECTIVE
To assess the effectiveness of the interventions to prevent a pregnancy in adolescence.
DESIGN
Systematic review.
DATA SOURCES
The following databases were consulted: PubMed, CINAHL, Scopus, Cuiden Plus, LILACS, and IME, in order to identify interventions aimed at preventing a pregnancy in adolescence.
STUDY SELECTION
A total of 24 primary investigations, in which an educational program to prevent a pregnancy in the adolescence was evaluated, were selected. The quality of the selected studies was assessed according to the CASPe scale.
RESULTS
Educational programs for the modification of the teenage pregnancy rate show inconclusive results, as there are 2 studies that find a reduction, and 2 that find that there are no significant changes. For secondary outcomes, it was found that educational programs are effective for increasing the knowledge level about sexuality and contraceptive methods and changing attitudes about the risk of a teenage pregnancy or the use of contraceptive methods. There are no statistically significant differences between the studies with a positive and negative outcome (P>.05) for any of the results analysed in this review.
CONCLUSION
There is no a single intervention modality that is the most effective for prevention of a teenage pregnancy. More research is needed with a longitudinal approach that assess not only intermediate results, but also a modification in the pregnancy rate.
Topics: Adolescent; Female; Health Education; Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice; Humans; Pregnancy; Pregnancy in Adolescence; Primary Prevention; Program Evaluation
PubMed: 29903543
DOI: 10.1016/j.aprim.2018.04.003 -
Nutrients Jan 2023Diabetes disrupts one in six pregnancies, bestowing immediate and long-term health risks to mother and child. Diet and exercise are commonly prescribed to control... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
Nutritional and Exercise-Focused Lifestyle Interventions and Glycemic Control in Women with Diabetes in Pregnancy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.
Diabetes disrupts one in six pregnancies, bestowing immediate and long-term health risks to mother and child. Diet and exercise are commonly prescribed to control dysglycemia, but their effectiveness across sub-populations and types of diabetes (type-1; type-2; or gestational diabetes mellitus, GDM) is uncertain. Therefore, a systematic review and meta-analysis on the effect of diet and/or exercise on glycemia in pregnant women with diabetes was conducted. Random effects models were used to evaluate effect sizes across studies and anticipated confounders (e.g., age, ethnicity, BMI). Of the 4845 records retrieved, 26 studies (8 nutritional supplements, 12 dietary, and 6 exercise interventions) were included. All studies were conducted in patients with GDM. Overall, supplement- and exercise-based interventions reduced fasting glucose (−0.30 mmol/L; 95% CI = −0.55, −0.06; p = 0.02; and 0.10 mmol/L; 95% CI = −0.20, −0.01; p = 0.04); and supplement- and diet-based interventions reduced HOMA-IR (−0.40; 95% CI = −0.58, −0.22; p < 0.001; and −1.15; 95% CI = −2.12, −0.17; p = 0.02). Subgroup analysis by confounders only confirmed marginal changed effect sizes. Our results suggest a favorable role of certain nutritional supplements, diet, and exercise practices on glycemia in women with GDM and underline a lack of evidence in ~20% of other diabetes-related pregnancies (i.e., women with pre-existing diabetes).
Topics: Female; Humans; Pregnancy; Diabetes, Gestational; Diet; Glycemic Control; Life Style; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36678193
DOI: 10.3390/nu15020323 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... May 2018Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is the most common cause of infrequent periods (oligomenorrhoea) and absence of periods (amenorrhoea). It affects about 4% to 8% of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is the most common cause of infrequent periods (oligomenorrhoea) and absence of periods (amenorrhoea). It affects about 4% to 8% of women worldwide and often leads to anovulatory subfertility. Aromatase inhibitors (AIs) are a class of drugs that were introduced for ovulation induction in 2001. Since about 2001 clinical trials have reached differing conclusions as to whether the AI letrozole is at least as effective as the first-line treatment clomiphene citrate (CC).
OBJECTIVES
To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of aromatase inhibitors for subfertile women with anovulatory PCOS for ovulation induction followed by timed intercourse or intrauterine insemination (IUI).
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the following sources from inception to November 2017 to identify relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs): the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, Pubmed, LILACS, Web of Knowledge, the World Health Organization (WHO) clinical trials register and Clinicaltrials.gov. We also searched the references of relevant articles. We did not restrict the searches by language or publication status.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all RCTs of AIs used alone or with other medical therapies for ovulation induction in women of reproductive age with anovulatory PCOS.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently selected trials, extracted the data and assessed risks of bias. We pooled studies where appropriate using a fixed-effect model to calculate odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for most outcomes, and risk differences (RDs) for ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). The primary outcomes were live birth and OHSS. Secondary outcomes were clinical pregnancy, miscarriage and multiple pregnancy. We assessed the quality of the evidence for each comparison using GRADE methods.
MAIN RESULTS
This is a substantive update of a previous review. We identified 16 additional studies for the 2018 update. We include 42 RCTs (7935 women). The aromatase inhibitor letrozole was used in all studies.Letrozole compared to clomiphene citrate (CC) with or without adjuncts followed by timed intercourseLive birth rates were higher with letrozole (with or without adjuncts) compared to clomiphene citrate (with our without adjuncts) followed by timed intercourse (OR 1.68, 95% CI 1.42 to 1.99; 2954 participants; 13 studies; I = 0%; number needed to treat for an additional beneficial outcome (NNTB) = 10; moderate-quality evidence). There is high-quality evidence that OHSS rates are similar with letrozole or clomiphene citrate (0.5% in both arms: risk difference (RD) -0.00, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.00; 2536 participants; 12 studies; I = 0%; high-quality evidence). There is evidence for a higher pregnancy rate in favour of letrozole (OR 1.56, 95% CI 1.37 to 1.78; 4629 participants; 25 studies; I = 1%; NNTB = 10; moderate-quality evidence). There is little or no difference between treatment groups in the rate of miscarriage by pregnancy (20% with CC versus 19% with letrozole; OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.26; 1210 participants; 18 studies; I = 0%; high-quality evidence) and multiple pregnancy rate (1.7% with CC versus 1.3% with letrozole; OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.41 to 1.16; 3579 participants; 17 studies; I = 0%; high-quality evidence). However, a funnel plot showed mild asymmetry, indicating that some studies in favour of clomiphene might be missing.Letrozole compared to laparoscopic ovarian drillingThere is low-quality evidence that live birth rates are similar with letrozole or laparoscopic ovarian drilling (OR 1.38, 95% CI 0.95 to 2.02; 548 participants; 3 studies; I = 23%; low-quality evidence). There is insufficient evidence for a difference in OHSS rates (RD 0.00, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.01; 260 participants; 1 study; low-quality evidence). There is low-quality evidence that pregnancy rates are similar (OR 1.28, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.74; 774 participants; 5 studies; I = 0%; moderate-quality evidence). There is insufficient evidence for a difference in miscarriage rate by pregnancy (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.43; 240 participants; 5 studies; I = 0%; moderate-quality evidence), or multiple pregnancies (OR 3.00, 95% CI 0.12 to 74.90; 548 participants; 3 studies; I = 0%; low-quality evidence).Additional comparisons were made for Letrozole versus placebo, Selective oestrogen receptor modulators (SERMS) followed by intrauterine insemination (IUI), follicle stimulating hormone (FSH), Anastrozole, as well as dosage and administration protocols. There is insufficient evidence for a difference in either group of treatment due to a limited number of studies. Hence more research is necessary.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Letrozole appears to improve live birth and pregnancy rates in subfertile women with anovulatory polycystic ovary syndrome, compared to clomiphene citrate. There is high-quality evidence that OHSS rates are similar with letrozole or clomiphene citrate. There is high-quality evidence of no difference in miscarriage rates or multiple pregnancy rates. There is low-quality evidence of no difference in live birth and pregnancy rates between letrozole and laparoscopic ovarian drilling, although there were few relevant studies. For the 2018 update, we added good-quality trials, upgrading the quality of the evidence.
Topics: Abortion, Spontaneous; Anastrozole; Aromatase Inhibitors; Birth Rate; Clomiphene; Coitus; Female; Fertility Agents, Female; Humans; Infertility, Female; Letrozole; Live Birth; Nitriles; Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome; Ovary; Ovulation Induction; Polycystic Ovary Syndrome; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Outcome; Pregnancy, Multiple; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Triazoles
PubMed: 29797697
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD010287.pub3 -
Fertility and Sterility Feb 2023To investigate the impact of endometrial receptivity array (ERA) before frozen embryo transfer in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF). There is a lack of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
OBJECTIVE
To investigate the impact of endometrial receptivity array (ERA) before frozen embryo transfer in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF). There is a lack of consensus regarding the use of ERA for increasing the success rate of IVF cycles, mainly in terms of the live birth rate.
DESIGN
PubMed, Web of Science and Embase were searched from inception up to February 15, 2022.
SETTING
Not applicable.
PATIENT(S)
Patients undergoing ERA vs no ERA before frozen embryo transfer.
INTERVENTION(S)
Only comparative studies evaluating pregnancy rates of patients undergoing frozen embryo transfer cycles with or without prior ERA were included. Inter-study heterogeneity was also assessed using Cochrane's Q test and the I statistic. The random-effects model was used to pool the odds ratio (OR) with the corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Subgroup analyses were performed to investigate the impact of ERA on pregnancy rates according to the number of previous embryo transfer (ET) failures (≤ 2 previous failed ETs vs. > 2 failed ETs, defined as recurrent implantation failure). Separate analyses were performed according to the study design and adjustment for confounders.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES(S)
The primary outcomes of the study were live birth rate and/or ongoing pregnancy rate. Implantation rate, biochemical pregnancy rate, clinical pregnancy rate, and miscarriage rate were considered secondary outcomes.
RESULT(S)
Eight studies (representing data on n = 2,784 patients; n = 831 had undergone ERA and n = 1,953 without ERA) were found to be eligible for this meta-analysis. The live birth or ongoing pregnancy rate for the ERA group was not significantly different compared with the non-ERA group (OR, 1.38; 95% CI, 0.79-2.41; I 83.0%), nor was a difference seen in subgroup analyses based on the number of previous failed ETs. The rates of implantation, biochemical pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, and miscarriage were also comparable between the ERA and the non-ERA groups. After separate analyses according to the study design and adjustment for confounding factors, overall pooled estimates remained statistically nonsignificant.
CONCLUSION(S)
The findings of the current meta-analysis did not reveal a significant change in the rate of pregnancy after IVF cycles using ERA, and it is not clear whether ERA can increase the pregnancy rate or not.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
Prospectively registered in PROSPERO (CRD42022310862).
Topics: Pregnancy; Female; Humans; Abortion, Spontaneous; Embryo Transfer; Fertilization in Vitro; Pregnancy Rate; Embryo Implantation; Live Birth; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 36414088
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2022.11.012