-
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Apr 2005In vitro fertilisation (IVF) is now a widely accepted treatment for unexplained infertility (RCOG 1998). However, with estimated live-birth rates per cycle varying... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
In vitro fertilisation (IVF) is now a widely accepted treatment for unexplained infertility (RCOG 1998). However, with estimated live-birth rates per cycle varying between 13% and 28%, its effectiveness has not been rigorously evaluated in comparison with other treatments. With increasing awareness of the role of expectant management and less invasive procedures such as intrauterine insemination, concerns about multiple complications and costs associated with IVF, it is extremely important to evaluate the effectiveness of IVF against other treatment options in couples with unexplained infertility.
OBJECTIVES
The aim of this review is to determine, in the context of unexplained infertility, whether IVF improves the probability of live-birth compared with (1) expectant management, (2) clomiphene citrate (CC), (3) intrauterine insemination (IUI) alone, (4) IUI with controlled ovarian stimulation, and (5) gamete intrafallopian transfer (GIFT).
SEARCH STRATEGY
We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Trials Register (searched 23 March 2004), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Cochrane Library Issue 3, 2004), MEDLINE (1970 to August 2004), EMBASE (1985 to August 2004) and reference lists of articles. We also handsearched relevant conference proceedings and contacted researchers in the field.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Only randomised controlled trials were included. Live-birth rate per woman was the primary outcome of interest.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two reviewers independently assessed eligibility and quality of trials.
MAIN RESULTS
Ten randomised controlled trials were identified. In two we could not extract data separately for unexplained infertility cases, two were non-randomised, one did not report valid rates (included in the review but not in the meta-analysis); leaving four trials for analysis. One trial compared two different interventions (IVF versus IUI with or without ovarian stimulation) and one study compared three interventions (IVF versus IUI with ovarian stimulation and GIFT). The numbers of trials assessing the effectiveness of IVF with the other treatments were as follows: IVF versus expectant management (two), IVF versus IUI (one), IVF versus IUI with ovarian stimulation (two) and IVF versus GIFT (three). Live-birth rate per woman was reported in three studies and three studies determined clinical pregnancy rate per woman. Multiple pregnancy rate was reported in three trials. Two studies reported ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) as an outcome measure. There were no comparative data for clomiphene citrate and no comparative data on live-birth rates for GIFT. There was no evidence of a difference in live-birth rates between IVF and IUI either without (OR 1.96; 95% CI 0.88 to 4.4) or with (OR 1.15; 95% CI 0.55 to 2.4) ovarian stimulation. There were significantly higher clinical pregnancy rates with IVF in comparison to expectant management (OR 3.24; 95% CI 1.07 to 9.80). There was no significant difference between IVF and GIFT for the one RCT that reported live-birth rates (OR 2.57; 95% CI 0.93 to 7.08). However, there was a significant difference in the clinical pregnancy rates between IVF and GIFT, with pregnancy rates greater for IVF (OR 2.14; 95% CI 1.08 to 4.2). There was no evidence of a difference in the multiple pregnancy rates between IVF and IUI with ovarian stimulation (OR 0.63; 95% CI 0.27 to 1.5), however, IVF had a higher rate than GIFT (OR 6.3; 95% CI 1.7 to 23). Clinical heterogeneity was present among the studies included. However, there was no evidence of statistical heterogeneity, which allowed the studies to be combined for statistical analysis.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Any effect of IVF relative to expectant management, clomiphene citrate, IUI with or without ovarian stimulation and GIFT in terms of live-birth rates for couples with unexplained subfertility remains unknown. The studies included are limited by their small sample size so that even large differences might be hidden. Live-birth rates are seldom reported. Periods of follow up are inadequate and unequal. Adverse effects such as multiple pregnancies and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome have also not been reported in most studies. Larger trials with adequate power are warranted to establish the effectiveness of IVF in these women. Future trials should not only report rates per woman/couple but also include adverse effects and costs of the treatments as outcomes. Factors that have a major effect on these outcomes such as fertility treatment, female partner's age, duration of infertility and previous pregnancy history should also be considered.
Topics: Clomiphene; Female; Fertility Agents, Female; Fertilization in Vitro; Gamete Intrafallopian Transfer; Humans; Infertility; Insemination, Artificial; Ovulation Induction; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 15846658
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003357.pub2 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... 2002In vitro fertilisation (IVF) is now a widely accepted treatment for unexplained infertility (RCOG 1998). However, with estimated livebirth rates per cycle varying... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
In vitro fertilisation (IVF) is now a widely accepted treatment for unexplained infertility (RCOG 1998). However, with estimated livebirth rates per cycle varying between 13% and 28%, it's effectiveness has not been rigorously evaluated in comparison with other treatments. With increasing awareness of the role of expectant management and less invasive procedures such as intrauterine insemination, concerns about multiple complications and costs associated with IVF, it is extremely important to evaluate the effectiveness of IVF against other treatment options in couples with unexplained infertility.
OBJECTIVES
The aim of this review is to determine, in the context of unexplained infertility, whether IVF improves the probability of livebirth compared with 1. expectant management 2. clomiphene citrate (CC) 3. intra uterine insemination (IUI) alone 4. IUI with controlled ovarian stimulation and 5. Gamete IntraFallopian Transfer (GIFT).
SEARCH STRATEGY
RCTs were identified using the search strategies developed for the Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group. See Review group for more information.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Only randomised controlled trials were included. Livebirth rate per woman was the primary outcome of interest.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two reviewers independently assessed eligibility and quality of trials.
MAIN RESULTS
Nine randomised controlled trials were identified. In two we could not extract data separately for unexplained infertility cases, two were non-randomised, one reported no valid rates (included in the review and not in the meta-analysis), leaving four trials for analysis. One trial compared two different interventions (IVF versus IUI with or without ovarian stimulation) and one study compared three interventions (IVF versus IUI with ovarian stimulation and GIFT). The number of trials assessing the effectiveness of IVF with the other treatments were as follows: IVF versus expectant management (one), IVF versus IUI (one), IVF versus IUI with ovarian stimulation (two) and IVF versus GIFT (three). Livebirth rate per woman was reported in two studies and three studies determined clinical pregnancy rate per woman. Multiple pregnancy rate was reported in three trials. Two studies reported ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) as an outcome measure. There were no comparative data for clomiphene citrate, and no comparative data on livebirth rates for expectant management or GIFT. There was no evidence of a difference in livebirth rates between IVF and IUI either without (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.23 to 1.1) or with (OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.8) ovarian stimulation. There was no evidence of a difference in clinical pregnancy rates between IVF and expectant management. There was no significant difference in the clinical pregnancy rates between IVF and GIFT (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.92). There was no evidence of a difference in the multiple pregnancy rates between IVF and either IUI with ovarian stimulation (OR 1.59, 95% CI 0.68 to 3.70) or GIFT (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.58). Clinical heterogeneity was present among the studies included. However, there was no evidence of statistical heterogeneity, which allowed the studies to be combined for statistical analysis.
REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS
Any effect of IVF relative to expectant management, clomiphene citrate, IUI with or without ovarian stimulation and GIFT in terms of livebirth rates for couples with unexplained subfertility remains unknown. The studies included are limited by their small sample size, so that even large differences might be hidden. Livebirth rates are seldom reported. Adverse effects such as multiple pregnancies and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome have also not been reported in most studies. Larger trials with adequate power are warranted to establish the effectiveness of IVF in these women. Future trials should not only report rates per woman /couple but also include adverse effects and costs of the treatments compared as outcomes. Factors that have a major effect on these outcomes such as fertility treatment, female partner's age, duration of infertility and previous pregnancy history should also be considered.
Topics: Female; Fertilization in Vitro; Gamete Intrafallopian Transfer; Humans; Infertility; Insemination, Artificial; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 12076476
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003357 -
Human Reproduction (Oxford, England) Sep 1997A systematic review was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of intrauterine insemination (IUI) with or without ovarian stimulation using gonadotrophin in the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
A systematic review was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of intrauterine insemination (IUI) with or without ovarian stimulation using gonadotrophin in the treatment of persistent infertility. Relevant randomized controlled trials were identified by a diverse strategy including a hand search of 43 core journals from 1966 to the present. Two approaches to meta-analysis were used to summarize data. First, using a standard Mantel-Haenszel approach, eight trials comparing FSH/IUI with FSH/timed intercourse for unexplained infertility were combined. The common odds ratio for pregnancy was 2.37 [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.43, 3.90], suggesting a significant improvement with IUI following ovulation induction in this patient group. Although the data were statistically homogeneous, clinically important heterogeneity was present. Second, across all diagnostic groups, the independent effects of treatment with follicle stimulating hormone (FSH), clomiphene citrate, IUI, as well as the diagnoses of male factor and endometriosis were assessed using stepwise logistic regression. Based on 5214 cycles reported in 22 trials, the odds ratio for pregnancy associated with FSH use was 2.35 (95% CI, 1.87, 2.94) for IUI, 2.82 (95% CI, 2.18, 3.66) for male factor, 0.48 (95% CI, 0.37, 0.61), and for endometriosis 0.45 (95% CI, 0.27, 0.76). This summary of the best available evidence may prove useful in counselling couples who are considering FSH and/or IUI therapy.
Topics: Clomiphene; Female; Follicle Stimulating Hormone; Humans; Infertility; Insemination, Artificial; Logistic Models; Male; Ovulation Induction; Pregnancy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 9363697
DOI: 10.1093/humrep/12.9.1865 -
Reproduction & Fertility May 2024Chronic endometritis (CE) in humans is asymptomatic inflammation of the endometrium, associated with poor reproductive outcomes. Similarly asymptomatic endometrial...
Chronic endometritis (CE) in humans is asymptomatic inflammation of the endometrium, associated with poor reproductive outcomes. Similarly asymptomatic endometrial inflammation in cows, termed subclinical endometritis (SCE), is associated with adverse reproductive outcomes. While the pathophysiology and treatment options for CE in humans remains poorly defined, the financial implications of SCE in dairy cows mean it has been intensively researched. We performed a systematic review with an emergent theme thematic analysis of studies of SCE in cows, to determine potential areas of interest in human CE research. A literature search for studies of subclinical endometritis in cows published between 1990 and November 2021 was performed across Embase, Medline, Scopus and CINAHL. Studies of symptomatic or clinical endometritis were excluded. Thematic analysis across two broad themes were explored: diagnostic methods and pathophysiology of SCE. In total, 44 bovine studies were included. 12 studies reported on diagnostic methodology. The primary emergent theme was the use of cytology for the diagnosis of SCE. This method has a lower sensitivity than histopathology but is less invasive and more specific than alternative techniques of ultrasound, vaginoscopy, or metabolic markers. The subthemes related to pathophysiology were identified as type of endometritis, metabolic stress, artificial insemination, infective causes, and altered cellular pathways. Despite the lack of symptoms, cellular pathways of inflammation including NFkB, MAPK, and inflammasomes were found to be activated. The key themes related to the diagnosis and pathophysiology of SCE in cows identified in this systematic review highlight potential areas for future research into human CE.
PubMed: 38734031
DOI: 10.1530/RAF-23-0035 -
Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology... Mar 2018Physical activity (PA) behaviours after assisted reproductive technology (ART) may influence its success. Bedrest is frequently recommended immediately after...
Physical activity (PA) behaviours after assisted reproductive technology (ART) may influence its success. Bedrest is frequently recommended immediately after intrauterine insemination (IUI) or embryo transfer (ET), and women are also commonly advised to restrict PA after ART. However, these recommendations are not grounded on evidence-based information. The purpose of this systematic review was to assess the impact of PA behaviours during ART on ART success (positive pregnancy test, clinical pregnancy, live birth). A systematic search of the literature was conducted in PubMed, Medline, SPORTdiscus, and CINAHL. The Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation system was applied to studies by clinical outcome and used to rate quality of evidence. Twelve studies were included in the review. Our findings suggest that the effect of bedrest immediately after IUI or ET on ART success depends on the procedure used, with favourable effects after IUI ("moderate" quality evidence on clinical pregnancy) but no effect, and even possible unfavourable effects, after ET ("very low" quality evidence on positive pregnancy test and clinical pregnancy). "Very low" quality evidence suggested a decreased live birth rate with bedrest after ET (n = 1) but an increased rate with bedrest after IUI (n = 1). "Very low" quality of evidence suggested no deleterious effect of moderate PA on clinical pregnancy and live birth after ET. On the basis of our findings, studies with more rigourous design and methodology, and considering live birth as an outcome, are needed to provide further evidence on the most appropriate PA behaviours women should adopt to improve ART success.
Topics: Bed Rest; Birth Rate; Embryo Transfer; Exercise; Female; Humans; Insemination, Artificial; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 28826643
DOI: 10.1016/j.jogc.2017.07.001