European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology · 2017
Local endometrial injury in women with failed IVF undergoing a repeat cycle: A randomized controlled trial.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Tk Aleyamma, Singhal Himanshu, S Premkumar Prasanna, Acharya Mousumi, S Kamath Mohan, George Korula
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of local endometrial injury in women undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF) with at least one previous unsuccessful attempt.
STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. Recruited women were randomized into two groups. In group A (pipelle group), women underwent pipelle biopsy twice in the luteal phase in the cycle prior to IVF. In group B (control), women did not undergo any intervention prior to IVF. The primary outcome was clinical pregnancy rate. The secondary outcomes included live birth, miscarriage, multiple pregnancy and preterm delivery rates.
RESULTS: One hundred and eleven women were included in the study with 55 in the pipelle group and 56 in the control arm. The baseline clinical characteristics were similar in both groups. The clinical pregnancy rates were not significantly different between pipelle and control group (34.09% vs. 27.65%; Odds ratio, OR 1.35, 95% confidence interval, CI 0.55-3.30). The live birth (31.81% vs. 25.53%; OR 1.36, 95% CI 0.55-3.39), multiple pregnancy (33.33% vs. 61.54%; OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.07-1.47), miscarriage (6.66% vs. 7.69%; OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.05-15.23) and preterm delivery rates (35.71% vs. 66.66%; OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.05-1.4) were also not significantly different between the two groups.
CONCLUSION: Current study did not find any improvement in IVF success rates following endometrial injury in woman undergoing IVF after previous failed attempt.
STUDY DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. Recruited women were randomized into two groups. In group A (pipelle group), women underwent pipelle biopsy twice in the luteal phase in the cycle prior to IVF. In group B (control), women did not undergo any intervention prior to IVF. The primary outcome was clinical pregnancy rate. The secondary outcomes included live birth, miscarriage, multiple pregnancy and preterm delivery rates.
RESULTS: One hundred and eleven women were included in the study with 55 in the pipelle group and 56 in the control arm. The baseline clinical characteristics were similar in both groups. The clinical pregnancy rates were not significantly different between pipelle and control group (34.09% vs. 27.65%; Odds ratio, OR 1.35, 95% confidence interval, CI 0.55-3.30). The live birth (31.81% vs. 25.53%; OR 1.36, 95% CI 0.55-3.39), multiple pregnancy (33.33% vs. 61.54%; OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.07-1.47), miscarriage (6.66% vs. 7.69%; OR 0.86, 95% CI 0.05-15.23) and preterm delivery rates (35.71% vs. 66.66%; OR 0.28, 95% CI 0.05-1.4) were also not significantly different between the two groups.
CONCLUSION: Current study did not find any improvement in IVF success rates following endometrial injury in woman undergoing IVF after previous failed attempt.