The Australian & New Zealand journal of obstetrics & gynaecology · 2002
IVF and tubal pathology--not all bad news.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Johnson Neil P, Sadler Lynn, Merrilees Margaret
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: In light of evidence that hydrosalpinges compromise the chance of success of in vitro fertilisation (IVF), the aim of this study was to analyse the results of IVF treatment at our clinic in relation to the cause for infertility and to make inferences concerning the impact of mild tubal disease on IVF outcome.
DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. SETTING Tertiary fertility clinic in New Zealand.
POPULATION: Nine hundred and six consecutive cycles among 639 couples receiving IVF treatment in the six-year period 1995-2000 inclusive.
METHODS: Data extraction from the clinic database.
RESULTS: The clinical pregnancy rate of 17.5% per ovarian stimulation cycle and 23.9% per embryo transfer for the cycles of couples with tubal disease as the only cause for infertility was not significantly different from the clinical pregnancy rate of 15.4% per ovarian stimulation cycle and 24.1% per embryo transfer for all other couples undergoing IVF. In the cycles of women with tubal disease, the clinical pregnancy rate of 6.6% per ovarian stimulation cycle where other causes for infertility were also present, was significantly lower than the clinical pregnancy rate of 17.5% where tubal factor alone was present. In the cycles of couples with multiple causes for infertility, where the overall pregnancy rate was 10.9% per ovarian stimulation cycle, there was no significant difference in pregnancy rate between those whose multiple causes included tubal disease (6.6% per ovarian stimulation cycle) and those whose multiple causes did not include tubal disease (17.5% per ovarian stimulation cycle).
CONCLUSION: The overall population of women with tubal disease as the sole cause for infertility (including women with hydrosalpinges and those with non-hydrosalpinx tubal disease) does not have an overall reduced likelihood of success at IVF. This suggests that non-hydrosalpinx tubal disease does not compromise the chance of success from IVF. Surgical treatment prior to IVF for the milder forms of tubal disease is not warranted.
DESIGN: Retrospective observational study. SETTING Tertiary fertility clinic in New Zealand.
POPULATION: Nine hundred and six consecutive cycles among 639 couples receiving IVF treatment in the six-year period 1995-2000 inclusive.
METHODS: Data extraction from the clinic database.
RESULTS: The clinical pregnancy rate of 17.5% per ovarian stimulation cycle and 23.9% per embryo transfer for the cycles of couples with tubal disease as the only cause for infertility was not significantly different from the clinical pregnancy rate of 15.4% per ovarian stimulation cycle and 24.1% per embryo transfer for all other couples undergoing IVF. In the cycles of women with tubal disease, the clinical pregnancy rate of 6.6% per ovarian stimulation cycle where other causes for infertility were also present, was significantly lower than the clinical pregnancy rate of 17.5% where tubal factor alone was present. In the cycles of couples with multiple causes for infertility, where the overall pregnancy rate was 10.9% per ovarian stimulation cycle, there was no significant difference in pregnancy rate between those whose multiple causes included tubal disease (6.6% per ovarian stimulation cycle) and those whose multiple causes did not include tubal disease (17.5% per ovarian stimulation cycle).
CONCLUSION: The overall population of women with tubal disease as the sole cause for infertility (including women with hydrosalpinges and those with non-hydrosalpinx tubal disease) does not have an overall reduced likelihood of success at IVF. This suggests that non-hydrosalpinx tubal disease does not compromise the chance of success from IVF. Surgical treatment prior to IVF for the milder forms of tubal disease is not warranted.