Search

For patients with recurrent implantation failure in IVF, histologic or transcriptomic testing of the endometrium during the mid-secretory phase is often considered. Histological dating of endometrial biopsies (Noyes criteria) can determine if endometrial morphology is consistent with the period of receptivity. Alternatively, endometrial tissue can be sent for a commercial Endometrial Receptivity Array (ERA) test which characterizes the gene expression of the endometrium using a panel of 238 genes that have been implicated in endometrial receptivity. This study aimed to compare the two tests to assess their concordance and to examine the ability of the ERA to successfully predict implantation and pregnancy in a subsequent personalized embryo transfer. A retrospective review was done of 97 patients with a history of implantation failure who underwent an ERA, 35 of whom had histologic dating on the same sample. ERA and histology were classified as 'concordant' when samples were receptive by both tests or non-receptive by both tests. The ERA result was then used to personalize the embryo transfer day, and pregnancy rates from the first subsequent frozen transfer cycle were analyzed. The results indicated that there is poor concordance between ERA and histological dating with only 40.0% agreement and a kappa (95%CI) = -0.18 (-0.50, 0.14). According to the ERA, 48.5% of biopsies were receptive, 47.4% were non-receptive and 2.01% were insufficient tissue for analysis. The clinical pregnancy rate in patients shown to be receptive by ERA was 26.7% and non-receptive was 22.5% following the subsequent personalized ET (p = 0.66). This study concludes that there is a high degree of discordance between histological dating of the endometrium and molecular analysis by ERA. There was no evidence of clinical benefit when embryo transfer was personalized according to ERA in patients with a history of implantation failure.

Objective: This study sought to answer the following question: What are the complications and assisted reproductive technology outcomes among women with hydrosalpinges managed by hysteroscopic microinsert tubal occlusion compared with women with hydrosalpinges managed by laparoscopic proximal tubal occlusion or salpingectomy?, Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study conducted from January 2009 to December 2014 at two academic, tertiary care, in vitro fertilization centres in Toronto, Ontario. All patients (n = 52) who underwent hysteroscopic tubal occlusion for hydrosalpinges were identified. Patients who proceeded with embryo transfer cycles after hysteroscopic microinsert (n = 33) were further age matched to a cohort of patients who underwent embryo transfer after laparoscopic proximal tubal occlusion or salpingectomy (n = 33). Main outcome measures were clinical pregnancy rate per patient and per embryo transfer cycle., Results: Among 33 patients, there were 39 fresh and 37 frozen embryo transfer cycles in the hysteroscopic group (group A); among 33 patients in the laparoscopic group (group B), there were 42 fresh and 29 frozen embryo transfer cycles. The cumulative clinical pregnancy rate in group A and group B was similar (66.7% vs. 69.7%, respectively; P = 0.8). The clinical pregnancy rate per embryo transfer cycle was also similar in both groups (28.9% in group A vs. 32.4% in group B; P = 0.6). There were two incidents of ectopic pregnancy in the laparoscopic group and no ectopic pregnancy in the hysteroscopic group. There were three major complications: tubo-ovarian abscess, distal migration of the coil after microinsert placement, and an acute abdomen following the hysteroscopic procedure., Conclusion: Pregnancy outcomes after hysteroscopic placement of a microinsert for hydrosalpinx management before embryo transfer were comparable to those following laparoscopic proximal tubal occlusion or salpingectomy. However, caution is advised regarding microinsert placement for hydrosalpinges before proceeding with assisted reproductive technology., (Copyright © 2019 The Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada/La Société des obstétriciens et gynécologues du Canada. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The objective of this study was to examine a 1-year pilot program aimed at increasing access to fertility preservation (FP) information and services for reproductive-age women newly diagnosed with cancer at a centre geographically remote from a tertiary fertility clinic. An oncofertility nurse navigator (ONN) position was created within the regional cancer centre with the goals of (1) improving local physician knowledge of FP and FP services and (2) improving patient access to FP counselling and services. The ONN identified all women diagnosed with cancer requiring treatment that could impact their fertility and discussed FP options with them and their physicians. As part of a comprehensive program aimed at facilitating access to FP services, the ONN arranged consultations with fertility specialists via telemedicine and coordinated satellite cycle monitoring with a local gynaecologist in order to minimize travel. Patients were surveyed about their reproductive plans, decision-making around FP and experiences with the program. Physicians were surveyed about their engagement with FP services, barriers to FP access and satisfaction with the program. Twenty-two women were eligible for FP during the year-long pilot program. All participated in the study. The most common diagnoses were breast and cervical cancer. At the time of diagnosis, 36.4% of women had no biological children and 68.2% did not desire (more) children. Four women had an FP consultation, and two proceeded with oocyte or embryo cryopreservation. At the end of the pilot program, more physician respondents often or always discussed FP with their patients, stated they frequently refer for FP consultations and stated their patients could obtain FP services in a timely fashion. An ONN within a cancer centre remote from tertiary fertility care can enable access to FP services with minimal need for travel by using local gynaecologic expertise and telemedicine.

Objective: The aims of this study were to examine the prevalence of Celiac disease (CD) in Canadian women with unexplained infertility versus women with an identifiable cause of infertility and to assess the sensitivity of the point-of-care Biocard Celiac Test Kit versus standard serum serologic testing., Methods: In this prospective cohort study, women aged 18 to 44 who were evaluated for infertility between February 2010 and May 2012 at a tertiary academic care fertility clinic in Toronto, ON, were invited to participate. They were categorized as having unexplained infertility (Cases) or infertility secondary to a known cause (Controls). Women on a gluten-free diet or previously diagnosed with CD were excluded. Outcome measures were the Celiac Questionnaire, serum testing for tissue transglutaminase IgA antibody (anti-tTG IgA), serum IgA levels, and Biocard Celiac Test Kit., Results: Of 685 women approached, 1.2% (4/326) with unexplained infertility and 1.1% (4/359) with an identifiable infertility cause were newly found to have CD. Biocard testing revealed the same results as standard serologic IgA and anti-tTG IgA testing., Conclusion: CD was not more common in women with unexplained infertility than those with an identifiable cause of infertility. These results do not support the routine screening of Canadian women with infertility for CD., (Copyright © 2018. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

This study assessed whether an obesity-related health status instrument (Edmonton obesity scoring system - EOSS) or body mass index (BMI) better predicted pregnancy rates in overweight women undergoing fertility treatments. A prospective cohort study was conducted on patients with a BMI ≥ 25 kg m(-2) undergoing a fertility treatment cycle (ovulation induction, superovulation, or in vitro fertilization). Obesity-related health status including blood pressure, blood work, health history, and functional assessment were assessed. A total of 101 patients were included in the study with an average age of 36.3 ± 4.2 years and a mean BMI of 31.8 ± 5.2 kg m(-2) . EOSS was found to be statistically predictive of pregnancy rate/cycle (OR 0.51, 95% CI 0.27-0.94; P = 0.03), whereas BMI was not (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.86-1.05). A similar trend was seen for clinical pregnancy rate/cycle started. However, the association between clinical pregnancy rates and EOSS or BMI did not reach statistical significance (OR 0.53, P = 0.06 and OR 0.98, P = 0.62 respectively). Our results demonstrated that EOSS better predicted pregnancy rates after fertility treatments than BMI. In fact, for every EOSS stage increased by one unit, the odds of pregnancy were approximately halved. A multi-centre study powered for live birth is warranted to establish effective pre-fertility management of overweight women., (© 2016 World Obesity.)