Search

Study Question: Are the guidelines for the technical aspects of IUI (WHO, 2010) still in accordance with the current literature?Summary Answer: In general, the laboratory guidelines of the World Health Organization (WHO) are a suitable protocol, although the evidence is not always conclusive and some changes are advisable.What Is Known Already: Lack of standardization of the technical procedures required for IUI might result in inter-laboratory variation in pregnancy rates. Most centers still use their own materials and methods even though some guidelines are available.Study Design, Size, Duration: A structural review focusing on the association between pregnancy rates and the procedures of semen collection (e.g. ejaculatory abstinence, collection place), semen processing (e.g. preparation method, temperature during centrifugation/storage), insemination (e.g. timing of IUI, bed rest after IUI) and the equipment used.Participants/materials, Setting, Methods: A literature search was performed in Medline and the Cochrane library. When no adequate studies of the impact of a parameter on pregnancy results were found, its association with sperm parameters was reviewed.Main Results and the Role Of Chance: For most variables, the literature review revealed a low level of evidence, a limited number of studies and/or an inadequate outcome measure. Moreover, the comparison of procedures (i.e. semen preparation technique, time interval between semen, collection, processing and IUI) revealed no consensus about their results. It was not possible to develop an evidence-based, optimal IUI treatment protocol.Limitations, Reasons For Caution: The included studies exhibited a lack of standardization in inclusion criteria and methods used.Wider Implications Of the Findings: This review emphasizes the need for more knowledge about and standardization of assisted reproduction technologies. Our literature search indicates that some of the recommendations in the laboratory guidelines could be adapted to improve standardization, comfort, quality control and to cut costs.Study Funding/competing Interest(s): The Dutch Foundation for Quality Assessment in Medical Laboratories (SKML), Nijmegen, The Netherlands. S.K. and W.N. have no conflicts of interest to disclose. C.B. and A.W. are members of the board of the SKML. With a grant from SKML, L.L. was paid for her time to perform the research and write the publication. D.B. received grants from Merck Serono, Ferring and MSD, outside the submitted work.Registration Number: N/A. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND: Evidence-based morphological embryo scoring models for ranking of implantation potential are still scarce, and the need for a precise model increases when aiming for singleton pregnancies. METHODS: Prospectively, 2266 IVF/ICSI double-embryo, day 2 transfers were studied. The five variables scored in 3- to 5-step scales for the embryos transferred are blastomere number (BL), fragmentation, blastomere size variation (‘equality’, EQ), symmetry of the cleavage and mononuclearity in the blastomeres (NU). The scoring results of embryos with an individual traceability from scoring to implantation, i.e. treatments resulting in either no implantation (n = 1385) or twin implantation (n = 228), were studied for prognostic potential. RESULTS: Although all five variables correlated highly with implantation potential, only BL, NU and EQ remained independently significant after regression analysis. The equation thus derived formed the basis for a 10-point integrated morphology cleavage (IMC) embryo score. A table with the scoring point for each possible combination of the embryo variables is presented. The scoring model was statistically validated on the singleton pregnancy group (n = 653). CONCLUSIONS: We suggest that this IMC embryo scoring, incorporating cleavage stage and information on the variation in blastomere size and the number of mononucleated blastomeres, may optimize embryo ranking and selection for day 2 transfers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this prospective study was to investigate whether ovarian blood flow is related to embryological parameters and whether it could be a predictor of outcomes of IVF/ICSI. METHODS: Eighty infertile women underwent ovarian stimulation with gonadotrophins after a long protocol with GnRH agonists. The ovarian volume (OV), number of follicles (NF) and follicular volume (FV) of all follicles >10 mm and vascularization index (VI), flow index (FI) and vascularization–flow index (VFI) were obtained by three-dimensional (3D) ultrasonography and power Doppler angiography (PDA) on the day of HCG administration. These parameters were tested for their relation with IVF laboratory parameters. RESULTS: The OV, FV, VI, FI and VFI were significantly greater in the pregnant group. The NF and FV were the only independent predictors of the number of oocytes retrieved, mature and fertilized, and the number of embryos developed and their cumulative embryo score. Nevertheless, the number of grade 1 embryos depends on the NF and the VI. The ovarian FI and the number of transferred grade 1 embryos can predict gestation in 76% of IVF patients. A low FI and non-grade 1 embryo transferred are also associated with an increased pregnancy loss. CONCLUSION: 3D ultrasonography and PDA allow for an easier ovarian assessment in IVF cycles. The predictive value of IVF outcome suggests a high clinical usefulness of this new technique. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]