Search

Background: Implantation of an embryo within the endometrial cavity is a critical step in the process of in vitro fertilisation (IVF). Previous research has suggested that endometrial injury (also known as endometrial scratching), defined as intentional damage to the endometrium, can increase the chance of pregnancy in women undergoing IVF., Objectives: To assess the effectiveness and safety of endometrial injury performed before embryo transfer in women undergoing in vitro fertilisation (IVF) including intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) and frozen embryo transfer., Search Methods: In June 2020 we searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, LILACS, DARE and two trial registries. We also checked the reference sections of relevant studies and contacted experts in the field for any additional trials., Selection Criteria: Randomised controlled trials comparing intentional endometrial injury before embryo transfer in women undergoing IVF, versus no intervention or a sham procedure., Data Collection and Analysis: We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane. Two independent review authors screened studies, evaluated risk of bias and assessed the certainty of the evidence by using GRADE (Grading of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) criteria. We contacted and corresponded with study investigators as required. Due to the high risk of bias associated with many of the studies, the primary analyses of all review outcomes were restricted to studies at a low risk of bias for selection bias and other bias. Sensitivity analysis was then performed including all studies. The primary review outcomes were live birth and miscarriage., Main Results: Endometrial injury versus control (no procedure or a sham procedure) A total of 37 studies (8786 women) were included in this comparison. Most studies performed endometrial injury by pipelle biopsy in the luteal phase of the cycle before the IVF cycle. The primary analysis was restricted to studies at low risk of bias, and included eight studies. The effect of endometrial injury on live birth is unclear as the result is consistent with no effect, or a small reduction, or an improvement (odds ratio (OR) 1.12, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.98 to 1.28; participants = 4402; studies = 8; I 2 = 15%, moderate-certainty evidence). This suggests that if the chance of live birth with IVF is usually 27%, then the chance when using endometrial injury would be somewhere between < 27% and 32%. Similarly, the effect of endometrial injury on clinical pregnancy is unclear (OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.23; participants = 4402; studies = 8; I 2 = 0%, moderate-certainty evidence). This suggests that if the chance of clinical pregnancy from IVF is normally 32%, then the chance when using endometrial injury before IVF is between 31% and 37%. When all studies were included in the sensitivity analysis, we were unable to conduct meta-analysis for the outcomes of live birth and clinical pregnancy due to high risk of bias and statistical heterogeneity. Endometrial injury probably results in little to no difference in chance of miscarriage (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.13; participants = 4402; studies = 8; I 2 = 0%, moderate-certainty evidence), and this result was similar in the sensitivity analysis that included all studies. The result suggests that if the chance of miscarriage with IVF is usually 6.0%, then when using endometrial injury it would be somewhere between 4.2% and 6.8%. Endometrial injury was associated with mild to moderate pain (approximately 4 out of 10), and was generally associated with some minimal bleeding. The evidence was downgraded for imprecision due to wide confidence intervals and therefore all primary analyses were graded as moderate certainty. Higher versus lower degree of injury Only one small study was included in this comparison (participants = 129), which compared endometrial injury using two different instruments in the cycle prior to the IVF cycle: a pipelle catheter and a Shepard catheter. This trial was excluded from the primary analysis due to risk of bias. In the sensitivity analysis, all outcomes reported for this study were graded as very-low certainty due to risk of bias, and as such we were not able to interpret the study results., Authors' Conclusions: The effect of endometrial injury on live birth and clinical pregnancy among women undergoing IVF is unclear. The results of the meta-analyses are consistent with an increased chance, no effect and a small reduction in these outcomes. We are therefore uncertain whether endometrial injury improves the chance of live birth or clinical pregnancy in women undergoing IVF. Endometrial injury does not appear to affect the chance of miscarriage. It is a somewhat painful procedure associated with a small amount of bleeding. In conclusion, current evidence does not support the routine use of endometrial injury for women undergoing IVF., (Copyright © 2021 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Objectives: To identify uterine measurements that are reliable and accurate to distinguish between T-shaped and normal/arcuate uterus, and define T-shaped uterus, using Congenital Uterine Malformation by Experts (CUME) methodology, which uses as reference standard the decision made most often by several independent experts., Methods: This was a prospectively planned multirater reliability/agreement and diagnostic accuracy study, performed between November 2017 and December 2018, using a sample of 100 three-dimensional (3D) datasets of different uteri with lateral uterine cavity indentations, acquired from consecutive women between 2014 and 2016. Fifteen representative experts (five clinicians, five surgeons and five sonologists), blinded to each others' opinions, examined anonymized images of the coronal plane of each uterus and provided their independent opinion as to whether it was T-shaped or normal/arcuate; this formed the basis of the CUME reference standard, with the decision made most often (i.e. that chosen by eight or more of the 15 experts) for each uterus being considered the correct diagnosis for that uterus. Two other experienced observers, also blinded to the opinions of the other experts, then performed independently 15 sonographic measurements, using the original 3D datasets of each uterus. Agreement between the diagnoses made by the 15 experts was assessed using kappa and percent agreement. The interobserver reliability of measurements was assessed using the concordance correlation coefficient (CCC). The diagnostic test accuracy was assessed using the area under the receiver-operating-characteristics curve (AUC) and the best cut-off value was assessed by calculating Youden's index, according to the CUME reference standard. Sensitivity, specificity, negative and positive likelihood ratios (LR- and LR+) and post-test probability were calculated., Results: According to the CUME reference standard, there were 20 T-shaped and 80 normal/arcuate uteri. Individual experts recognized between 5 and 35 (median, 19) T-shaped uteri on subjective judgment. The agreement among experts was 82% (kappa = 0.43). Three of the 15 sonographic measurements were identified as having good diagnostic test accuracy, according to the CUME reference standard: lateral indentation angle (AUC = 0.95), lateral internal indentation depth (AUC = 0.92) and T-angle (AUC = 0.87). Of these, T-angle had the best interobserver reproducibility (CCC = 0.87 vs 0.82 vs 0.62 for T-angle vs lateral indentation depth vs lateral indentation angle). The best cut-off values for these measurements were: lateral indentation angle ≤ 130° (sensitivity, 80%; specificity, 96%; LR+, 21.3; LR-, 0.21), lateral indentation depth ≥ 7 mm (sensitivity, 95%; specificity, 77.5%; LR+, 4.2; LR-, 0.06) and T-angle ≤ 40° (sensitivity, 80%; specificity, 87.5%; LR+, 6.4; LR-, 0.23). Most of the experts diagnosed the uterus as being T-shaped in 0% (0/56) of cases when none of these three criteria was met, in 10% (2/20) of cases when only one criterion was met, in 50% (5/10) of cases when two of the three criteria were met, and in 93% (13/14) of cases when all three criteria were met., Conclusions: The diagnosis of T-shaped uterus is not easy; the agreement among experts was only moderate and the judgement of individual experts was commonly insufficient for accurate diagnosis. The three sonographic measurements with cut-offs that we identified (lateral internal indentation depth ≥ 7 mm, lateral indentation angle ≤ 130° and T-angle ≤ 40°) had good diagnostic test accuracy and fair-to-moderate reliability and, when applied in combination, they provided high post-test probability for T-shaped uterus. In the absence of other anomalies, we suggest considering a uterus to be normal when none or only one criterion is met, borderline when two criteria are met, and T-shaped when all three criteria are met. These three CUME criteria for defining T-shaped uterus may aid in determination of its prevalence, clinical implications and best management and in the assessment of post-surgical morphologic outcome. The CUME definition of T-shaped uterus may help in the development of interventional randomized controlled trials and observational studies and in the diagnosis of uterine morphology in everyday practice, and could be adopted by guidelines on uterine anomalies to enrich their classification systems. Copyright © 2019 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd., (Copyright © 2019 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Subfertility is a condition found in up to 15% of couples of reproductive age. Gamete micromanipulation, such as intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), is very useful for treating couples with compromised sperm parameters. An alternative method of sperm selection has been described; the spermatozoa are selected under high magnification (over 6000x) and used for ICSI. This technique, named intracytoplasmic morphologically selected sperm injection (IMSI), has a theoretical potential to improve reproductive outcomes among couples undergoing assisted reproduction techniques (ART). However, our previous version of this Cochrane Review was unable to find evidence that supported this possible beneficial effect. This is an update of Teixeira 2013., Objectives: To identify, appraise, and summarise the available evidence regarding efficacy and safety of IMSI compared to ICSI in couples undergoing ART., Search Methods: We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in these electronic databases: the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, LILACS, and in these trial registers: ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. We also handsearched the reference lists of included studies and similar reviews. We performed the last electronic search on 18 November 2019., Selection Criteria: We only considered RCTs that compared ICSI and IMSI; we did not include quasi-randomised trials. We considered studies that permitted the inclusion of the same participant more than once (cross-over or per cycle trials) only if data regarding the first treatment of each participant were available., Data Collection and Analysis: Two review authors independently performed study selection, data extraction, and assessment of the risk of bias and quality of the evidence; we solved disagreements by consulting a third review author. We corresponded with study investigators to resolve any queries, as required., Main Results: The updated search retrieved 535 records; we included 13 parallel-designed RCTs comparing IMSI and ICSI (four studies were added since the previous version), comprising 2775 couples (IMSI = 1256; ICSI = 1519). We are uncertain if IMSI improves live birth rates (risk ratio (RR) 1.11, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.89 to 1.39; 5 studies, 929 couples; I² = 1%), miscarriage rates per couple (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.48; 10 studies, 2297 couples; I² = 0%, very-low quality evidence), and miscarriage rate per pregnancy (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.20; 10 studies, 783 couples; I² = 0%, very-low quality evidence). We are uncertain if IMSI improves clinical pregnancy rates (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.37; 13 studies, 2775 couples; I² = 47%, very-low quality evidence). None of the included studies reported congenital abnormalities. We judged the evidence for all outcomes to be of very low-quality. We downgraded the quality of the evidence due to limitations of the included studies (risk of bias), inconsistency of results, and a strong indication of publication bias., Authors' Conclusions: The current evidence from randomised controlled trials does not support or refute the clinical use of intracytoplasmic sperm injection (intracytoplasmic morphologically selected sperm injection (IMSI). We are very uncertain of the chances of having a live birth and of the risk of having a miscarriage. We found very low-quality evidence that IMSI may increase chances of a clinical pregnancy, which means that we are still very uncertain about any real difference. We did not find any trials reporting on the risk of congenital abnormalities. Well-designed and sufficiently powered trials are still required., (Copyright © 2020 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Objectives: To estimate the differences in frequency of diagnosis of septate uterus using three different definitions and determine whether these differences are significant in clinical practice, and to examine the association between diagnosis of septate uterus, using each of the three definitions, and infertility and/or previous miscarriage as well as the cost of allocation to surgery., Methods: This was a secondary analysis of data from a prospective study of 261 consecutive women of reproductive age attending a private clinic focused on the diagnosis and treatment of congenital uterine malformations. Reanalysis of the datasets was performed according to three different means of defining septate uterus: following the recommendations of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM), a 2016 update of those of the American Fertility Society from 1988 (ASRM-2016: internal fundal indentation depth ≥ 1.5 cm, angle of internal indentation < 90° and external indentation depth < 1 cm); following the recommendations of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology/European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESHRE/ESGE), published in 2013 and reaffirmed in 2016 (ESHRE/ESGE-2016: internal fundal/uterine indentation depth > 50% of uterine-wall thickness and external indentation depth < 50% of uterine-wall thickness, with uterine-wall thickness measured above interostial/intercornual line); and using a definition published last year which was based on the decision made most often by a group of experts (Congenital Uterine Malformation by Experts; CUME) (CUME-2018: internal fundal indentation depth ≥ 1 cm and external fundal indentation depth < 1 cm). We compared the rate of diagnosis of septate uterus using each of these three definitions and, for each, we estimated the association between the diagnosis and infertility and/or previous miscarriage, and anticipated the costs associated with their implementation using a guesstimation method., Results: Although 32.6% (85/261) of the subjects met the criteria for one of the three definitions of septate uterus, only 2.7% (7/261) of them were defined as having septate uterus according to all three definitions. We diagnosed significantly more cases of septate uterus using ESHRE/ESGE-2016 than using ASRM-2016 (31% vs 5%, relative risk (RR) = 6.7, P < 0.0001) or CUME-2018 (31% vs 12%, RR = 2.6, P < 0.0001) criteria. We also observed frequent cases that could not be classified definitively by ASRM-2016 (gray zone: neither normal/arcuate nor septate; 6.5%). There were no significant differences (P > 0.05) in the prevalence of septate uterus in women with vs those without infertility according to ASRM-2016 (5% vs 4%), ESHRE/ESGE-2016 (35% vs 28%) or CUME-2018 (11% vs 12%). Septate uterus was diagnosed significantly more frequently in women with vs those without previous miscarriage according to ASRM-2016 (11% vs 3%; P = 0.04) and CUME-2018 (22 vs 10%; P = 0.04), but not according to ESHRE/ESGE-2016 (42% vs 28%; P = 0.8) criteria. Our calculations showed that global costs to the healthcare system would be highly dependent on the criteria used in the clinical setting to define septate uterus, with the costs associated with the ESHRE/ESGE-2016 definition potentially being an extra US$ 100-200 billion over 5 years in comparison to ASRM-2016 and CUME-2018 definitions., Conclusions: The prevalence of septate uterus according to ESHRE/ESGE-2016, ASRM-2016 and CUME-2018 definitions differs considerably. An important limitation of the ASRM classification, which needs to be addressed, is the high proportion of unclassifiable cases originally named, by us, the 'gray zone'. The high rate of overdiagnosis of septate uterus according to ESHRE/ESGE-2016 may lead to unnecessary surgery and therefore unnecessary risk in these women and may impose a considerable financial burden on healthcare systems. Efforts to define clinically meaningful and universally applicable criteria for the diagnosis of septate uterus should be encouraged. Copyright © 2019 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd., (Copyright © 2019 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Purpose:  To estimate the inter-observer reliability and agreement of offline analyses of three different ultrasound techniques for assessing tubal patency., Methods:  100 tubes (n = 100) in 50 women were evaluated for tubal patency between November 2013 and July 2015 using ultrasound as index tests and laparoscopy as the reference standard. Three different ultrasound techniques were applied: two-dimensional grayscale ultrasound using air + saline as the contrast media (2D-HyCoSy); two- and three-dimensional grayscale ultrasound using foam as the contrast media (2 D/3D-HyFoSy); and the same technique but adding bi-directional power Doppler (2 D/3D-Doppler-HyFoSy). The videos containing full standardized exams using these three techniques were split into three parts, anonymized, encoded, randomized and reassessed in Nov. 2015 by two observers who assessed tubal patency using standardized criteria. These observers were blinded to any clinical information and each other's results. Proportions of observed agreement (po) and Cohen's Kappa (κ) including the 95 % confidence intervals (CI) were calculated., Results:  The inter-observer reliability/agreement in 2 D/3D-Doppler-HyFoSy (po = 0.99, κ = 0.95, 95 % CI: 0.93 - 0.97) was higher compared to 2D-air/saline-HyCoSy (po = 0.83, κ = 0.55, 95 % CI: 0.40 - 0.68) and 2 D/3D-HyFoSy (po = 0.92, κ = 0.67, 95 % CI: 0.54 - 0.76)., Conclusion:  The inter-observer reliability and agreement of the diagnosis of tubal patency evaluating stored videos are improved when foam and power Doppler are used during acquisition. Therefore, this technique may be preferred to minimize misclassification and misdiagnosis., Competing Interests: Disclosure The authors report no conflicts of interest in this work., (© Georg Thieme Verlag KG Stuttgart · New York.)

Objective: To identify, appraise, and summarize the evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing oral dydrogesterone to vaginal progesterone capsules for luteal-phase support (LPS) in women offered fresh or frozen embryo transfers following in vitro fertilization., Methods: Two independent authors screened the literature for papers based on titles and abstracts, then selected the studies, extracted data, and assessed the risk of bias. Dydrogesterone and progesterone were compared based on risk ratios (RR) and the precision of the estimates was assessed through the 95% confidence interval (CI)., Results: An electronic search performed on June 7, 2017 retrieved 376 records, nine of which were papers deemed eligible and included in this systematic review and quantitative analysis. Good quality evidence indicates that oral dydrogesterone provided at least similar results than vaginal progesterone capsules on live birth/ongoing pregnancy (RR=1.08, 95%CI=0.92-1.26, I2=29%, 8 RCTs, 3,386 women) and clinical pregnancy rates (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.95 to 1.27; I2=43%; 9 RCTs; 4,061 women). Additionally, moderate quality evidence suggests there is no relevant difference on miscarriage rates (RR=0.92, 95%CI=0.68-1.26, I2=6%, 8 RCTs, 988 clinical pregnancies; the quality of the evidence was downgraded because of imprecision)., Conclusions: Good quality evidence from RCTs suggest that oral dydrogesterone provides at least similar reproductive outcomes than vaginal progesterone capsules when used for LPS in women undergoing embryo transfers. Dydrogesterone is a reasonable option and the choice of either of the medications should be based on cost and side effects.

Objectives: To assess the level of agreement between experts in distinguishing between septate and normal/arcuate uterus using their subjective judgment when reviewing the coronal view of the uterus from three-dimensional ultrasound. Another aim was to determine the interobserver reliability and diagnostic test accuracy of three measurements suggested by recent guidelines, using as reference standard the decision made most often by experts (Congenital Uterine Malformation by Experts (CUME))., Methods: Images of the coronal plane of the uterus from 100 women with suspected fundal internal indentation were anonymized and provided to 15 experts (five clinicians, five surgeons and five sonologists). They were instructed to indicate whether they believed the uterus to be normal/arcuate (defined as normal uterine morphology or not clinically relevant degree of distortion caused by internal indentation) or septate (clinically relevant degree of distortion caused by internal indentation). Two other observers independently measured indentation depth, indentation angle and indentation-to-wall-thickness (I:WT) ratio. The agreement between experts was assessed using kappa, the interobserver reliability was assessed using the concordance correlation coefficient (CCC), the diagnostic test accuracy was assessed using the area under the receiver-operating characteristics curve (AUC) and the best cut-off value was assessed using Youden's index, considering as the reference standard the choice made most often by the experts (CUME)., Results: There was good agreement between all experts (kappa, 0.62). There were 18 septate and 82 normal/arcuate uteri according to CUME; European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE)-European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE) criteria (I:WT ratio > 50%) defined 80 septate and 20 normal/arcuate uteri, while American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) criteria defined five septate (depth > 15 mm and angle < 90°), 82 normal/arcuate (depth < 10 mm and angle > 90°) and 13 uteri that could not be classified (referred to as the gray-zone). The agreement between ESHRE-ESGE and CUME was 38% (kappa, 0.1); the agreement between ASRM criteria and CUME for septate was 87% (kappa, 0.39), and considering both septate and gray-zone as septate, the agreement was 98% (kappa, 0.93). Among the three measurements, the interobserver reproducibility of indentation depth (CCC, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.98-0.99) was better than both indentation angle (CCC, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.94-0.97) and I:WT ratio (CCC, 0.92; 95% CI, 0.90-0.94). The diagnostic test accuracy of these three measurements using CUME as reference standard was very good, with AUC between 0.96 and 1.00. The best cut-off values for these measurements to define septate uterus were: indentation depth ≥ 10 mm, indentation angle < 140° and I:WT ratio > 110% ., Conclusions: The suggested ESHRE-ESGE cut-off value overestimates the prevalence of septate uterus while that of ASRM underestimates this prevalence, leaving in the gray-zone most of the uteri that experts considered as septate. We recommend considering indentation depth ≥ 10 mm as septate, since the measurement is simple and reliable and this criterion is in agreement with expert opinion. Copyright © 2017 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd., (Copyright © 2017 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objective: To assess the available evidence comparing effectiveness of ovarian stimulation (OS) using clomiphene citrate (CC) and/or letrozole (LTZ) to reduce follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) consumption compared with standard OS., Methods: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that compared reproductive outcomes following in-vitro fertilization. We searched 11 electronic databases and hand-searched the reference lists of included studies and related reviews. We stratified the results, separating studies according to the oral agent used (CC or LTZ) and the characteristics of the included women (expected poor ovarian response or other women). When combining the results of the included studies, we assessed the relative risk (RR) for live birth, clinical pregnancy, miscarriage and cycle cancelation, the Peto odds ratio (OR) for ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) and mean difference (MD) for the number of oocytes retrieved and FSH consumption., Results: A total of 22 studies were included in the review. Considering women with expected poor ovarian response, the available evidence suggested that using CC to reduce FSH consumption during OS provided similar rates of live birth (RR, 0.9 (95% CI, 0.6-1.2), moderate-quality evidence) and clinical pregnancy (RR, 1.0 (95% CI, 0.8-1.4), moderate-quality evidence); the use of LTZ did not cause a relevant change in the number of oocytes retrieved (MD, -0.4 (95% CI, -0.9 to 0.1), high-quality evidence). Considering the studies evaluating other women, the available evidence suggested that using CC to reduce FSH consumption during OS reduced the number of oocytes retrieved (MD, -4.6 (95% CI, -6.1 to -3.0), high-quality evidence) and risk of OHSS (Peto OR, 0.2 (95% CI, 0.1-0.3), moderate-quality evidence), while results were similar for rates of live birth (RR, 0.9 (95% CI, 0.7-1.1), moderate-quality evidence) and clinical pregnancy (RR, 1.0 (95% CI, 0.8-1.1), high-quality evidence). The quality of the evidence was low or very low for other outcomes., Conclusion: The use of CC to reduce FSH consumption in women with expected poor ovarian response has the advantage of providing similar reproductive outcomes with reduced costs. For the other women, the use of CC for reducing FSH consumption has the additional advantage of reducing OHSS, but also reduces the total number of oocytes retrieved. More studies are needed to evaluate the effect of LTZ for the same purpose. Future studies should focus on cumulative pregnancy per oocyte retrieval, patient dissatisfaction and agreement to repeat the cycle if not pregnant, which are important outcomes for clinical decisions. Copyright © 2017 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd., (Copyright © 2017 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

This study is focused in appraising the current evidence comparing double and single IUI for achieving a pregnancy. The primary outcomes were live birth and ectopic pregnancy per women randomized. Secondary outcomes included clinical pregnancy and miscarriage. The evaluation of the risk of bias within each study was structured using the Cochrane risk of bias and the overall quality of the body of evidence was assessed through the GRADE criteria. Electronic searches were run in 4 databases and resulted in 15 studies included encompassing 3795 women. The subgroup 'mild male infertility' included 1246 women whilst the subgroup 'normal semen quality' included 1188 women. Clinical pregnancy was reported by all studies, and there is no evidence of a difference between single and double IUI (RR 1.22, CI 0.97 to 1.54, 15 RCTs, 3795 women, I 2 =45%). In the subgroup analysis, we could not identify a particular group that could benefit from the intervention. No conclusion can be drawn regarding live birth, ectopic pregnancy, and miscarriage because they were reported by too few studies and the estimates were too imprecise. Currently, there is no evidence to support the use of double IUI in clinical practice. It requires a second appointment and insemination, thus making the treatment more complex and expensive, without a clear evidence of a benefit. Nevertheless, evidence is still of low quality and our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: the true effect may be substantially different from the hereby demonstrated., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Blastocyst transfer in assisted reproduction techniques could be advantageous because the timing of exposure of the embryo to the uterine environment is more analogous to a natural cycle and permits embryo self-selection after activation of the embryonic genome on day 3. Conversely, the in-vitro environment is likely to be inferior to that in vivo, and in-vitro culture beyond embryonic genomic activation could potentially harm the embryo. Our objective was to identify, appraise and summarize the available evidence comparing the effectiveness of blastocyst vs cleavage-stage embryo transfer., Methods: This was a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the transfer of blastocysts (days 5-6) with the transfer of cleavage-stage embryos (days 2-3) in women undergoing in-vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection. The last electronic searches were run on 1 August 2016. Abstracts and studies with a mean difference between the two study groups of > 0.5 for the number of embryos transferred were excluded., Results: We screened 1187 records and assessed 33 potentially eligible studies. Twelve studies were included, comprising a total of 1200 women undergoing blastocyst transfer and 1218 undergoing cleavage-stage embryo transfer. We observed low-quality evidence of no significant difference of blastocyst transfer on live birth/ongoing pregnancy (relative risk (RR), 1.11 (95% CI, 0.92-1.35), 10 RCTs, 1940 women, I 2  = 54%), clinical pregnancy (RR, 1.10 (95% CI, 0.93-1.31), 12 RCTs, 2418 women, I 2  = 64%), cumulative pregnancy (RR, 0.89 (95% CI, 0.67-1.16), four RCTs, 524 women, I 2  = 63%) and miscarriage (RR, 1.08 (95% CI, 0.74-1.56), 10 RCTs, 763 pregnancies, I 2  = 0%). There was moderate-quality evidence of a decrease in the number of women with surplus embryos after the blastocyst-stage embryo transfer (RR, 0.78 (95% CI, 0.66-0.91)). Overall, the quality of the evidence was limited by the quality of the included studies and by unexplained inconsistency across studies., Conclusions: Current evidence shows no superiority of blastocyst compared with cleavage-stage embryo transfer in clinical practice. As the quality of the evidence for the primary outcomes is low, additional well-designed RCTs are still needed before robust conclusions can be drawn. Copyright © 2016 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd., (Copyright © 2016 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Study Objective: To determine the pain intensity and incidence of mild to severe pain during the ultrasound assessment of the uterine cavity and tubal patency using saline, air and saline, and foam as contrasts with and without painkiller., Design: Prospective observational study (Canadian Task Force classification II-1)., Setting: Private clinic., Patients: Three hundred infertile women who were consecutively submitted to uterine cavity and tubal patency assessment by ultrasound using saline, air, and foam in single exam between October 2012 and November 2013., Interventions: No painkillers were used until March 2013 when we started offering an effervescent codeine tablet containing paracetamol 500 mg and codeine phosphate 30 mg approximately 1 hour before the procedure., Measurements and Main Results: Pain intensity measured with an 11-point (0-10) numerical rating scale and incidence of moderate/severe levels of pain (numerical rating scale > 3) during the main components of the procedure (speculum insertion, catheter insertion, saline infusion, air and saline infusion, foam infusion, and after the procedure [0 minutes, 15 minutes, 30 minutes, and 24 hours]) were assessed. The incidence of moderatesevere pain was significantly lower in women using painkillers considering any moment of the procedure: 49 of 175 (28%) versus 65 of 125 (52%); relative risk, .54; 95% confidence interval, .40-.72; p < .001; number needed to treat, 4. Less women presented with moderate/severe pain during air and saline compared with foam infusion: 31 of 300 (10%) versus 75 of 300 (25%); p < .001; relative risk, .41, 95% confidence interval, .28-.61., Conclusion: The incidence of moderate/severe pain during the ultrasound assessment of the uterine cavity and tubal patency is common. Our results suggest that using paracetamol + codeine before the procedure reduces the pain level, but randomized controlled trials are required., (Copyright © 2017 AAGL. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To identify, appraise and summarize the current evidence regarding the efficacy of strategies aimed at improving assisted reproductive techniques in women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS)., Methods: A comprehensive literature search of the standard medical databases was performed. The last electronic search was run in July 2015. The primary outcome measures were live birth/ongoing pregnancy and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). The secondary outcome measures were clinical pregnancy and miscarriage., Results: We screened 1021 records and completely assessed 173, finally including 66 studies in the quantitative analysis. Many different interventions were assessed, however the overall quality of the studies was low. We observed moderate-quality evidence that there is no clinically relevant difference in live birth/ongoing pregnancy rates (relative risk (RR), 0.95 (95% CI, 0.84-1.08)), or clinical pregnancy (RR, 1.02 (95% CI, 0.91-1.15)) when comparing antagonist and agonist protocols for ovarian stimulation. Additionally, we found low-quality evidence that metformin improves live birth/ongoing pregnancy (RR, 1.28 (95% CI, 1.01-1.63)) and clinical pregnancy rates (RR, 1.26 (95% CI, 1.04-1.53)) when compared with placebo or no intervention. We further found low-quality evidence that there is no clinically relevant difference in live birth/ongoing pregnancy rates (RR, 1.03 (95% CI, 0.80-1.34)) and clinical pregnancy rates (RR, 0.99 (95% CI, 0.81-1.22)) when comparing human menopausal gonadotropin for inducing ovulation and artificial preparation with estradiol valerate for endometrial preparation for frozen embryo transfer (FET). Low-quality evidence suggests that mannitol compared with no intervention (RR, 0.54 (95% CI, 0.39-0.77)) and antagonist protocols compared with agonist protocols (RR, 0.63 (95% CI, 0.49-0.80)) reduce rates of OHSS., Conclusion: There is low- to moderate-quality evidence suggesting that antagonist protocols are preferable to agonist ones, because they reduce the incidence of OHSS without interfering with clinical pregnancy and live birth for women with PCOS. Additionally there is low-quality evidence pointing to a benefit of metformin supplementation on clinical pregnancy and live birth; and that ovulation induction and administration of estradiol seem to be equally effective for endometrial preparation before FET for women with PCOS. For all other interventions, the evidence is of very low quality, not allowing any meaningful conclusions to be drawn. Estrategias para mejorar el resultado de la reproducción asistida en mujeres con síndrome de ovario poliquístico: revisión sistemática y metaanálisis RESUMEN OBJETIVOS: Identificar, evaluar y resumir la evidencia actual sobre la eficacia de las estrategias para mejorar las técnicas de reproducción asistida en mujeres con síndrome de ovario poliquístico (SOP). MÉTODOS: Se realizó una búsqueda exhaustiva de literatura en las bases de datos médicas estándar. La última búsqueda electrónica se realizó en julio de 2015. Las medidas de resultado primarias fueron los nacimientos vivos/embarazos en curso y el síndrome de hiperestimulación ovárica (SHO). Las medidas de resultado secundarias fueron el embarazo confirmado ecográficamente y el aborto., Resultados: Se cribaron 1021 registros, de los que se evaluaron por completo 173, para finalmente incluir 66 estudios en el análisis cuantitativo. Aunque se evaluaron muchas intervenciones diferentes, en general la calidad de los estudios fue baja. Se observó evidencia de calidad moderada de que no hay diferencias relevantes clínicamente en las tasas de nacimientos vivos/embarazos en curso (riesgo relativo (RR): 0,95 (IC 95%, 0,84-1,08)), o de embarazos confirmados ecográficamente (RR: 1,02 (IC 95%, 0,91-1,15)), cuando se comparan los protocolos de antagonistas y agonistas para la estimulación ovárica. Además, se encontró evidencia de baja calidad en que la metformina mejora las tasas de nacimientos vivos/embarazos en curso (RR: 1,28 (IC 95%, 1,01-1,63)) y de embarazos confirmados ecográficamente (RR: 1,26 (IC 95%, 1,04-1,53)) en comparación con un placebo o la no intervención. Se encontró también evidencia de baja calidad en que no hay diferencias relevantes clínicamente en las tasas de nacimientos vivos/embarazos en curso (RR: 1,03 (IC 95%, 0,80-1,34)) y las tasas de embarazos confirmados ecográficamente (RR: 0,99 (IC 95%, 0.81-1,22)) al comparar la gonadotropina menopáusica humana para la inducción de la ovulación y la preparación artificial con el valerato de estradiol para preparar el endometrio para la transferencia de embriones congelados (TEC). La baja calidad de la evidencia sugiere que el manitol, en comparación con la no intervención (RR: 0,54 (IC 95%, 0,39-0,77)), y los protocolos de antagonistas, en comparación con los protocolos de agonistas (RR: 0,63 (IC 95%, 0,49-0,80)), reducen las tasas de SHO. CONCLUSIÓN: Hay evidencia de calidad baja a moderada que sugiere que los protocolos de antagonistas son preferibles a los de agonistas, ya que reducen la tasa de SHO sin interferir con el embarazo confirmado ecográficamente y los nacimientos vivos en las mujeres con SOP. Además, existe evidencia de baja calidad que indica un beneficio del uso de metformina como aporte suplementario en embarazos confirmados ecográficamente y en nacimientos vivos; y que la inducción de la ovulación y la administración de estradiol parecen ser igualmente eficaces para la preparación del endometrio antes de la TEC en mujeres con SOP. Para el resto de procedimientos, la evidencia es de muy baja calidad, y por ello no permite extraer conclusiones importantes., (Copyright © 2016 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Study Question: Is blastocyst transfer safe when compared to cleavage stage embryo transfer regarding obstetric and perinatal outcomes?, Summary Answer: The clinical equipoise between blastocyst and cleavage stage embryo transfer remains as the evidence associating blastocyst transfer with some adverse perinatal outcomes is of low/very low quality., What Is Known Already: Extended embryo culture to the blastocyst stage provides some theoretical advantages and disadvantages. While it permits embryo self-selection, it also exposes those embryos to possible harm due to the in vitro environment. Both effectiveness and safety should be weighed to permit evidence-based decisions in clinical practice., Study Design, Size, Duration: This is a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies reporting perinatal outcomes for singletons comparing the deliveries resulting from blastocyst and cleavage stage embryo transfer. Observational studies were included because the primary outcomes, perinatal mortality and birth defects, are rare and require a large number of participants (>50 000) to be properly assessed. The last electronic searches were last run on 11 March 2016., Participants/materials, Setting, Method: There were 12 observational studies encompassing 195 325 singleton pregnancies included in the study. No RCT reported the studied outcomes. The quality of the included studies was evaluated according to the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and the quality of the evidence was evaluated according to GRADE criteria., Main Results and the Role of Chance: Blastocyst stage transfer was associated with increased risks of preterm birth (<37 weeks), very preterm birth (<32 weeks), large for gestational age and perinatal mortality, although the latter was only identified from one study. Conversely, blastocyst stage transfer was associated with a decrease in the risks of small for gestational age and vanishing twins, although the latter was reported by only one study., Limitations, Reasons for Caution: The observational nature of the included studies and some inconsistency and imprecision in the analysis contributed to decreasing our confidence in the estimates., Wider Implications of the Findings: Due to the overall low quality of available evidence, the clinical equipoise between cleavage stage and blastocyst transfer remains. More large well-conducted studies are needed to clarify the potential risks and benefits of blastocyst transfer. As this review was initiated to support global recommendations on best practice, and in light of the challenges in lower resource settings to offer extended culture to blastocyst stage, it is critical to take into consideration these obstetric and neonatal outcomes in order to ensure any recommendation will not result in the overburdening of existing maternal and child health care systems and services., Study Funding/competing Interests: No external funding was either sought or obtained for this study. The authors have no competing interests to declare., Prospero Registration Number: CRD42015023910., (© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objectives: Essure® has been tested as an alternative treatment for hydrosalpinx before embryo transfer (ET) in women undergoing assisted reproduction techniques. However, the persistence of a foreign body inside the uterine cavity might have a negative impact on the outcome of pregnancy. The present systematic review aimed at identifying, appraising and summarizing the available evidence regarding the effectiveness and safety of using Essure prior to ET for women with hydrosalpinx., Methods: We searched for studies in PubMed, Scopus, CENTRAL, Web of Science and ClinicalTrials.gov and the reference lists of eligible studies. All studies including at least 10 women with hydrosalpinx who received Essure, any other intervention or no treatment prior to ET were considered eligible. Study selection, data extraction and evaluation of the risk of bias were performed independently by two authors. Study outcomes were miscarriage per clinical pregnancy, singleton preterm birth per singleton live birth and live birth/ongoing pregnancy and clinical pregnancy per ET. The pooled results for each outcome and intervention were summarized as proportions with their respective 95% CIs, using a random-effects model., Results: Our electronic search of databases was performed on 7 November 2015, and 26 studies with 43 study arms were considered eligible: eight study arms evaluating Essure; seven assessing tubal aspiration; seven appraising effects of no treatment; 12 evaluating salpingectomy; two assessing tubal division; and seven evaluating tubal occlusion. When compared with women who had no intervention, women with Essure had a higher clinical pregnancy rate per ET (36% (95% CI, 0-43%) vs 13% (95% CI, 9-17%)). When compared with women who had other interventions, women with Essure had a higher miscarriage rate per clinical pregnancy (38% (95% CI, 27-49%) vs 15% (95% CI, 10-19%))., Conclusions: The available evidence suggests that, although Essure prior to ET in women with hydrosalpinx improves the chance of achieving a clinical pregnancy compared with no intervention, it is associated with a higher rate of miscarriage when compared with the other interventions. Although this evidence is based on observational studies, we believe that salpingectomy should be the first option for women who are eligible for videolaparoscopy. However, it is still premature to make recommendations for women who are not eligible for surgery, and randomized controlled trials are needed to clarify which is the best treatment alternative in such a scenario. Copyright © 2016 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd., (Copyright © 2016 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to undertake a review of the available evidence comparing the use of a single medium versus sequential media for embryo culture to the blastocyst stage in clinical IVF., Methods: We searched the Cochrane Central, PubMed, Scopus, ClinicalTrials.gov, Current Controlled Trials and WHO International Clinical Trials Registry Platform to identify randomized controlled trials comparing single versus sequential media for blastocyst culture and ongoing pregnancy rate. Included studies randomized either oocytes/zygotes or women. Eligible oocyte/zygote studies were analyzed to assess the risk difference (RD) and 95 % confidence intervals (CI) between the two media systems; eligible woman-based studies were analyzed to assess the risk ratio (RR) and 95 % CI for clinical pregnancy rate., Results: No differences were observed between single and sequential media for either ongoing pregnancy per randomized woman (relative risk (RR) = 0.9, 95 % CI = 0.7 to 1.3, two studies including 246 women, I 2  = 0 %) or clinical pregnancy per randomized woman (RR = 1.0, 95 % CI = 0.7 to 1.4, one study including 100 women); or miscarriage per clinical pregnancy: RR = 1.3, 95 % CI = 0.4 to 4.3, two studies including 246 participants, I 2  = 0 %). Single media use was associated with an increase blastocyst formation per randomized oocyte/zygote (relative distribution (RD) = +0.06, 95 % CI = +0.01 to +0.12, ten studies including 7455 oocytes/zygotes, I 2  = 83 %) but not top/high blastocyst formation (RD = +0.05, 95 % CI = -0.01 to +0.11, five studies including 3879 oocytes/zygotes, I 2  = 93 %). The overall quality of the evidence was very low for all these four outcomes., Conclusions: Although using a single medium for extended culture has some practical advantages and blastocyst formation rates appear to be higher, there is insufficient evidence to recommend either sequential or single-step media as being superior for the culture of embryos to days 5/6. Future studies comparing these two media systems in well-designed trials should be performed.

Objectives: To compare the effects of dydrogesterone and progesterone for luteal-phase support (LPS) in women undergoing assisted reproductive techniques (ART)., Methods: We performed a systematic review to identify relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs) by searching the following electronic databases: Cochrane CENTRAL, PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov, ISRCTN Registry and WHO ICTRP., Results: The last search was performed in October 2015. Eight RCTs were considered eligible and were included in the review and meta-analyses. There was no relevant difference between oral dydrogesterone and vaginal progesterone for LPS with respect to rate of ongoing pregnancy (risk ratio (RR), 1.04 (95% CI, 0.92-1.18); I(2) , 0%; seven RCTs, 3134 women), clinical pregnancy (RR, 1.07 (95% CI, 0.93-1.23); I(2) , 34%; eight RCTs, 3809 women) or miscarriage (RR, 0.77 (95% CI, 0.53-1.10); I(2) , 0%; seven RCTs, 906 clinical pregnancies). Two of the three studies reporting on dissatisfaction of treatment identified lower levels of dissatisfaction among women using oral dydrogesterone than among women using vaginal progesterone (oral dydrogesterone vs vaginal progesterone capsules: 2/79 (2.5%) vs 90/351 (25.6%), respectively; oral dydrogesterone vs vaginal progesterone gel: 19/411 (4.6%) vs 74/411 (18.0%), respectively). The third study showed no difference in dissatisfaction rate (oral dydrogesterone vs vaginal progesterone capsules: 8/96 (8.3%) vs 8/114 (7.0%), respectively)., Conclusions: Oral dydrogesterone seems to be as effective as vaginal progesterone for LPS in ART cycles, and appears to be better tolerated . Copyright © 2015 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd., (Copyright © 2015 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objective: To appraise the available evidence comparing low oxygen (LowO2) and atmospheric oxygen tension (AtmO2) for embryo culture., Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis., Setting: Not applicable., Patient(s): Women undergoing assisted reproduction using embryo culture., Intervention(s): Embryo culture using LowO2 versus AtmO2., Main Outcome Measure(s): Reproductive, laboratory, and pregnancy outcomes., Result(s): A total of 21 studies were included in this review. All used O2 concentration between 5% and 6% in the LowO2 group. Considering the studies that randomized women/couples, we observed very low quality evidence that LowO2 is better for live birth/ongoing pregnancy (relative risk [RR] = 1.1, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.0-1.3) and clinical pregnancy (RR = 1.1, 95% CI 1.0-1.2). Considering the studies that randomized oocytes/embryos, we observed low quality evidence of no difference of fertilization (RR = 1.0, 95% CI 1.0-1.0) and cleavage rate (RR = 1.0, 95% CI 1.0-1.1), and low quality evidence that LowO2 is better for high/top morphology at the cleavage stage (RR = 1.2, 95% CI 1.1-1.3). No studies comparing pregnancy outcomes were identified. Several studies used different incubators in the groups-a new model for the LowO2 group and an old model for the AtmO2 group. The risk of detection bias for the laboratory outcomes was high as embryologists were not blinded., Conclusion(s): Although we observed a small improvement (∼5%) in live birth/ongoing pregnancy and clinical pregnancy rates (PRs), the evidence is of very low quality and the best interpretation is that we are still very uncertain about differences in this comparison. The clinical equipoise remains and more large well-conducted randomized controlled trials are needed. They should use the same incubators in both groups and the embryologists should be blinded at least when evaluating laboratory outcomes., (Copyright © 2016 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Intentional endometrial injury is currently being proposed as a technique to improve the probability of pregnancy in women undergoing assisted reproductive technologies (ART) such as in vitro fertilisation (IVF). Endometrial injury is often performed by pipelle biopsy or a similar technique, and is a common, simple, gynaecological procedure that has an established safety profile. However, it is also known to be associated with a moderate degree of discomfort/pain and requires an additional pelvic examination. The effectiveness of this procedure outside of ART, in women or couples attempting to conceive via sexual intercourse or with low complexity fertility treatments such as intrauterine insemination (IUI) and ovulation induction (OI), remains unclear., Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of intentional endometrial injury in subfertile women and couples attempting to conceive through sexual intercourse or intrauterine insemination (IUI)., Search Methods: We searched the Cochrane Gyanecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, LILACS, DARE, ISI Web of Knowledge and ClinicalTrials.gov; as well as reference lists of relevant reviews and included studies. We performed the searches from inception to 31 October 2015., Selection Criteria: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that evaluated any kind of intentional endometrial injury in women planning to undergo IUI or attempting to conceive spontaneously (with or without OI) compared to no intervention, a mock intervention or intentional endometrial injury performed at a different time or to a higher/lower degree., Data Collection and Analysis: Two review authors independently selected trials, extracted data and assessed trial quality using GRADE methodology. The primary outcomes were live birth/ongoing pregnancy and pain experienced during the procedure. Secondary outcomes were clinical pregnancy, miscarriage, ectopic pregnancy, multiple pregnancy and bleeding secondary to the procedure. We combined data to calculate pooled risk ratios (RRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the I(2) statistic., Main Results: Nine trials, which included a total of 1512 women, met the inclusion criteria of this Cochrane review. Most of these studies included women with unexplained infertility. In seven studies the women were undergoing IUI and in two studies the women were trying to conceive from sexual intercourse. Eight trials compared intentional endometrial injury with no injury/placebo procedure; of these two trials also compared intentional endometrial injury in the cycle prior to IUI with intentional endometrial injury in the IUI cycle. One trial compared higher vs. lower degree of intentional endometrial injury. Intentional endometrial injury vs. either no intervention or a sham procedureWe are uncertain whether endometrial injury improves live birth/ongoing pregnancy as the quality of the evidence has been assessed as very low (risk ratio (RR) 2.22, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.56 to 3.15; six RCTs, 950 participants; I² statistic = 0%, very low quality evidence). When we restricted the analysis to only studies at low risk of bias the effect was imprecise and the evidence remained of very low quality (RR 2.64, 95% CI 1.03 to 6.82; one RCT, 105 participants; very low quality evidence). Endometrial injury may improve clinical pregnancy rates however the evidence is of low quality (RR 1.98, 95% CI 1.51 to 2.58; eight RCTs, 1180 participants; I² statistic = 0%, low quality evidence).The average pain experienced by participants undergoing endometrial injury was 6/10 on a zero-10 visual analogue scale (VAS)(standard deviation = 1.5). However, only one study reported this outcome. Higher vs. lower degree of intentional endometrial injuryWhen we compared hysteroscopy with endometrial injury to hysteroscopy alone, there was no evidence of a difference in ongoing pregnancy rate (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.71 to 2.35; one RCT, 332 participants; low quality evidence) or clinical pregnancy rate (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.66 to 2.01; one RCT, 332 participants, low quality evidence). This study did not report the primary outcome of pain during the procedure. Timing of intentional endometrial injuryWhen endometrial injury was performed in the cycle prior to IUI compared to the same cycle as the IUI, there was no evidence of a difference in ongoing pregnancy rate (RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.16, one RCT, 176 participants; very low quality evidence) or clinical pregnancy rate (RR 0.82, 95% CI 0.50 to 1.36; two RCTs, 276 participants; very low quality evidence). Neither of these studies reported the primary outcome of pain during the procedure.In all three comparisons there was no evidence of an effect on miscarriage, ectopic pregnancy or multiple pregnancy. No studies reported bleeding secondary to the procedure., Authors' Conclusions: It is uncertain whether endometrial injury improves the probability of pregnancy and live birth/ongoing pregnancy in women undergoing IUI or attempting to conceive via sexual intercourse. The pooled results should be interpreted with caution as we graded the quality of the evidence as either low or very low. The main reasons we downgraded the quality of the evidence were most included studies were at a high risk of bias and had an overall low level of precision. Further well-conducted RCTs that recruit large numbers of participants and minimise internal bias are required to confirm or refute these findings.

Objective: To identify, evaluate and summarize the available evidence regarding the effectiveness and safety of administering a gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist during the luteal phase in women undergoing assisted reproductive techniques., Methods: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the addition of a GnRH agonist during the luteal phase, compared with standard luteal-phase support. We searched seven electronic databases and hand-searched the reference lists of included studies and related reviews. Our primary outcome was live birth or ongoing pregnancy per randomized woman. Our secondary outcomes were clinical pregnancy per randomized woman, miscarriage per clinical pregnancy, adverse perinatal outcome and congenital malformations., Results: The evidence from eight studies examining 2776 women showed a relative risk (RR) for live birth or ongoing pregnancy of 1.26 (95% CI, 1.04-1.53; I(2) = 58%). Sensitivity analysis when excluding the studies that did not report live birth and those at high risk of bias resulted in one study examining 181 women with an RR of 1.07 (95% CI, 0.73-1.58). Subgroup analysis separating the studies by single/multiple doses of GnRH agonists or by ovarian stimulation with GnRH agonist/antagonist was unable to explain the observed heterogeneity. The quality of the evidence was deemed to be very low: it was downgraded because of the limitation of the included studies, imprecision, inconsistency across the studies' results, and suspicion of publication bias. None of the included studies reported adverse perinatal outcomes or congenital malformations., Conclusions: There is evidence that adding GnRH agonist during the luteal phase improves the likelihood of ongoing pregnancy. However, this evidence is of very low quality and there is no evidence for adverse perinatal outcome and congenital malformations. We therefore believe that including this intervention in clinical practice would be premature., (Copyright © 2015 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objectives: To determine the influence of the pulse repetition frequency (PRF) and wall motion filter on the 3-dimensional (3D) power Doppler vascularization-flow index (VFI) and volumetric pulsatility index (PI) obtained from spatiotemporal image correlation (STIC) data sets acquired from a common carotid artery of a healthy participant., Methods: We acquired 11 STIC data sets, 1 for each PRF value ranging from 0.6 to 9.0 kHz. Vascularization-flow index and volumetric PI values were determined from the 440 static 3D data sets contained in these STIC data sets. Additionally, 3 sets of radio-frequency data were acquired for offline processing of different wall motion filter values for PRF values of 0.6, 3.3, and 10 kHz., Results: We constructed VFI curves and observed 2 patterns: a flattened pattern with a low PRF and a triphasic pattern with a high PRF, correlating with the known pulsed wave Doppler profile of this vessel. Volumetric PI values were around 0 for low PRF settings and increased with increasing PRF. Analysis of the radiofrequency data showed that increasing wall motion filter values gradually filtered out the low-velocity power Doppler signals while retaining the higher-velocity ones, allowing the distinction of integrated power Doppler signal velocity throughout the cardiac cycle., Conclusions: We conclude that the PRF and wall motion filter dramatically influence 3D power Doppler indices and the volumetric PI, and the use of PRF values in which minimum VFI values are measured during the diastolic phase in the spectral Doppler wave may validate the use of the volumetric PI., (© 2015 by the American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine.)

Objectives: To examine whether endometrial thickness and the presence of endometrioma are independent predictors of clinical pregnancy rate or simply associated with poor ovarian response (POR)., Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study assessing the first cycle of all women undergoing in-vitro fertilization (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) in a university hospital in Brazil between January 2011 and December 2012. Only the first cycle of each woman within the study period was considered. Women over 40 years of age and those who used clomiphene citrate during controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) or did not undergo embryo transfer were excluded from analysis. POR was defined as ≤ three oocytes retrieved and a thin endometrium was defined as endometrial thickness ≤ 7.0 mm on the day of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) administration. We performed a multiple regression analysis to identify which of the following parameters were independent predictors of clinical pregnancy: age, number of oocytes retrieved, endometrial thickness or the presence of endometrioma., Results: Within the study period, 787 women began COS, but 270 were excluded from analysis. Among the 517 women analyzed, those who achieved pregnancy were younger and yielded more oocytes. The proportion of POR was higher in women with a thin endometrium (17/57 (29.8%) vs 80/460 (17.4%); P = 0.03) and in women with endometrioma (15/39 (38.5%) vs 82/478 (17.2%); P = 0.002). The results of regression analysis showed that only age and the number of oocytes retrieved were independent predictors of pregnancy. Additionally, we observed higher clinical pregnancy rates in women with a thin endometrium from whom ≥ seven oocytes were retrieved (11/25 (44.0%)) compared to women with normal endometrial thickness (99/241 (41.1%)). Considering only women from whom ≥ four oocytes were retrieved, we observed reasonable pregnancy rates in those with a thin endometrium (14/40 (35.0%)) and in those with endometrioma (9/24 (37.5%))., Conclusion: Both a thin endometrium and the presence of endometrioma are associated with POR but are not important independent predictors of clinical pregnancy. Good pregnancy rates can be observed when these conditions are present in women with a good ovarian response., (Copyright © 2015 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Study Question: In couples with previous fertilization failure, are reproductive outcomes improved using ICSI followed by artificial oocyte activation (ICSI-AOA) compared with conventional ICSI?, Summary Answer: There is insufficient evidence available from RCTs to judge the efficacy and safety of ICSI-AOA for couples with previous fertilization failure., What Is Known Already: In cases with previous low fertilization rates or total fertilization failure using ICSI due to sperm-related, oocyte activation deficiency, several methods of AOA have been described, which employ mechanical, electrical or chemical stimuli. Reported fertilization and pregnancy rates appear to be improved after ICSI-AOA compared with conventional ICSI; however, the small studies performed to date make it difficult to assess the clinical efficacy or safety of AOA., Study Design, Size, and Duration: The present systematic review and meta-analysis identified RCTs that compared ICSI-AOA and conventional ICSI. The last electronic search was conducted in August 2014 and there was no limitation regarding language, publication date, or publication status. We included studies that randomized either oocytes or women and included them in two different parts of this review: a women-based review and an oocyte-based review. For the women-based review, the primary outcome of effectiveness was live birth per randomized woman and the primary outcome for safety was congenital anomalies per clinical pregnancy. For the oocyte-based review, the primary outcome was embryo formation per oocyte randomized., Participants/materials, Setting, and Methods: Record screening and data extraction were performed independently by two authors and risk of bias was assessed by three authors. The effects of ICSI-AOA compared with conventional ICSI were summarized as risk ratio (RR) and the precision of the estimates was evaluated by the 95% confidence interval (CI)., Main Results and the Role of Chance: A total of 14 articles were assessed for eligibility and 9 included in the meta-analysis: 2 studies comprised the woman-based review (n = 168 women) and 7 studies the oocyte-based review (n = 4234 oocytes). Only four studies evaluated AOA due to fertilization failure after conventional ICSI: these were included in the quantitative analysis. In two studies evaluating couples with a history of fertilization failure in a previous cycle, ICSI-AOA was associated with an increase in the proportion of cleavage stage embryos (RR 5.44, 95% CI 2.98-9.91) and top/high quality cleavage stage embryos (RR 10.02, 95% CI 2.45-40.95). There was no evidence of effect on fertilization rate (RR 2.97, 95% CI 0.84-10.48). In the two studies that evaluated ICSI-AOA as a rescue method for unfertilized oocytes after conventional ICSI, ICSI-AOA was associated with an increase in fertilization (RR 8.26, 95% CI 1.28-53.32, P = 0.03) and cleavage rates (RR 8.65, 95% CI 2.28-32.77) although there was no significant effect on the likelihood of blastocyst formation (RR 1.97, 95% CI 0.11-34.99). The remaining five studies evaluated ICSI-AOA for reasons other than fertilization failure and were excluded., Limitations and Reasons for Caution: The majority of the studies were not considered to be similar enough for meta-analysis due to different AOA methods and patient inclusion criteria, thus limiting the possibility of pooling studies and achieving a more robust conclusion. Only two studies examined ICSI-AOA in couples with previous fertilization failure, and only one of these included couples with proven male-related, oocyte activation deficiency, which is the primary indication for AOA. The resulting evidence was considered to be of very low quality and should be interpreted with caution., Wider Implications of the Findings: There is insufficient evidence available from the currently available RCTs to judge the efficacy or safety of ICSI-AOA on key reproductive outcomes in couples with previous fertilization failure. Such interventions should be further examined by well-designed RCTs before the introduction of ICSI-AOA as a standard treatment., Study Funding/competing Interests: No funding was obtained. No competing interests to declare., Registration Number: PROSPERO CRD42014007445., (© The Author 2015. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)

Objective: To evaluate whether the antral follicle count (AFC) is underestimated in the presence of an endometrioma., Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study assessing all women undergoing in-vitro fertilization (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) at our clinic between January 2011 and December 2012 who had both ovaries and unilateral endometrioma. The primary outcome of the study was the difference between AFC and the number of oocytes retrieved per ovary., Results: Within the study period 787 women underwent IVF/ICSI at our clinic. Sixty of these women had at least one endometrioma, but 23 were excluded from the analysis as six had only one ovary and 17 had bilateral endometriomas. Therefore a total of 37 women were included in this study and analysis. Compared with the contralateral ovaries, ovaries with an endometrioma were significantly larger in volume (median, 10.3 (interquartile range (IQR), 4.7-18.9)  cm(3) vs median, 3.6 (IQR, 2.7-6.5)  cm(3); P < 0.001) and presented a significantly lower AFC (median, 3.0 (IQR, 1.0-6.0) vs median, 5.0 (IQR, 2.0-6.5); P = 0.001). However, the median number of oocytes retrieved was similar (P = 0.60) between ovaries with an endometrioma (2.0 (IQR, 0.5-5.0)) and the contralateral ovaries (2.0 (IQR, 0.0-4.0)). Accordingly, the median difference between AFC and number of oocytes retrieved was significantly smaller (P = 0.005) for ovaries with an endometrioma (0.0 (IQR, -1.0 to 1.5) than for those without (2.0 (IQR, 0.0-4.0))., Conclusions: Although the AFC is reduced in ovaries with an endometrioma, the number of oocytes retrieved is similar, suggesting that the AFC is underestimated in such ovaries. We believe that this is a consequence of an impaired ability to detect small follicles in the presence of an endometrioma., (Copyright © 2014 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objectives: To examine the quality of methods used and the accuracy of the interpretation of agreement in existing studies that examine the reliability of ultrasound measurements and judgments in obstetrics and gynecology., Methods: A systematic search of MEDLINE was performed on 25 March 2014, looking for studies that examined the reliability of ultrasound measurements and judgments in obstetrics and gynecology with evaluation of concordance (CCC) or intraclass (ICC) correlation coefficients or kappa as a main objective., Results: Seven hundred and thirty-three records were examined on the basis of their title and abstract, of which 141 full-text articles were examined completely for eligibility. We excluded 29 studies because they did not report CCC/ICC/kappa, leaving 112 studies that were included in our analysis. Two studies reported both ICC and kappa and were counted twice, therefore, the number used as the denominator in the analyses was 114. Only 16/114 (14.0%) studies were considered to be well designed (independent acquisition and blinded analysis) and to have interpreted the results properly. Most errors occurring in the studies are likely to overestimate the reliability of the method examined., Conclusions: The vast majority of published studies examined had important flaws in design, interpretation and/or reporting. Such limitations are important to identify as they might create false confidence in the existing measurements and judgments, jeopardizing clinical practice and future research. Specific guidelines aimed at improving the quality of reproducibility studies that examine ultrasound methods should be encouraged., (Copyright © 2014 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objective: To identify, appraise and summarize the current evidence regarding the pathophysiology, staging, prediction and prevention of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS)., Methods: Two comprehensive systematic reviews were carried out: one examined methods of predicting either high ovarian response or OHSS and the other examined interventions aimed at reducing the occurrence of OHSS. Additionally, we describe the related pathophysiology and staging criteria., Results: Seven studies examining methods of predicting OHSS and eight more examining methods of predicting high ovarian response to controlled ovarian stimulation were included. Current evidence shows that the best methods of predicting high response are antral follicle count and anti-Müllerian hormone levels, and that a high ovarian response (examined by the number of large follicles, estradiol concentration or the number of retrieved oocytes) is the best method of predicting the occurrence of OHSS. Ninety-seven randomized controlled trials examining the effect of several interventions for reducing the occurrence of OHSS were included. There was high-quality evidence that replacing human chorionic gonadotropin by gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists or recombinant luteinizing hormone, and moderate-quality evidence that antagonist protocols, dopamine agonists and mild stimulation, reduce the occurrence of OHSS. The evidence for the effect of the other interventions was of low/very low quality. Additionally, we identified and described 12 different staging criteria., Conclusions: There are useful predictive tools and several preventive interventions aimed at reducing the occurrence of OHSS. Acknowledging and understanding them are of crucial importance for planning the treatment of, and, ultimately, eliminating, OHSS while maintaining high pregnancy rates., (Copyright © 2014 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Implantation of an embryo within the endometrial cavity is a critical step in assisted reproductive techniques (ART). Previous research has suggested that endometrial injury - intentional damage to the endometrium - can increase the probability of pregnancy in women undergoing ART., Objectives: To assess the effectiveness and safety of endometrial injury performed before embryo transfer in women undergoing ART., Search Methods: We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group (MDSG) Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Latin American Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS) and ClinicalTrials.gov. The original search was performed in November 2011, and further searches were done in March 2014 and January 2015., Selection Criteria: Randomised controlled trials comparing intentional endometrial injury before embryo transfer in women undergoing ART, versus no intervention or a sham procedure., Data Collection and Analysis: Two independent review authors screened studies and extracted data which were checked by a third review author. Two review authors independently assessed risk of bias. We contacted and corresponded with study investigators as required and analysed data using risk ratio (RR) and a random-effects model. We assessed the quality of the evidence by using GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) criteria., Main Results: We included 14 trials that included 1063 women in the intervention groups and 1065 women in the control groups. Thirteen studies compared endometrial injury performed between day 7 of the previous cycle and day 7 of the embryo transfer (ET) cycle versus no injury, and one study compared endometrial injury on the day of oocyte retrieval versus no injury. Overall, eight of the 14 included studies were deemed to be at high risk of bias in at least one domain.In studies comparing endometrial injury performed between day 7 of the previous cycle and day 7 of the ET cycle versus no intervention or a sham procedure, endometrial injury was associated with an increase in live birth or ongoing pregnancy rate: RR 1.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08 to 1.85; P value 0.01; nine RCTs; 1496 women; I² = 53%; moderate-quality evidence. In other words, moderate-quality evidence suggests that if 26% of women achieve live birth without endometrial injury, between 28% and 48% will achieve live birth with endometrial injury. A sensitivity analysis removing the studies at high risk of bias showed no difference in effect.There was no evidence of an effect on miscarriage, however the evidence is of low-quality: RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.53; P value 0.06; eight RCTs; 500 clinical pregnancies; I² = 10%; low-quality evidence.Endometrial injury was also associated with an increased clinical pregnancy rate: RR 1.34, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.61; P value 0.002; 13 RCTs; 1972 women; I² = 45%; moderate-quality evidence. This suggests that if 30% of women achieve clinical pregnancy without endometrial injury, between 33% and 48% will achieve clinical pregnancy with this intervention.Endometrial injury was associated with increased pain, however the evidence was of very low quality. One study reported pain on a VAS scale: MD 4.60, 95% CI 3.98 to 5.22; P value < 0.00001; one RCT; 158 women. Two studies reported the number of pain complaints after the procedure; one recorded no events in either group, and the other reported that endometrial injury increased pain complaints: OR 8.65, 95% CI 2.49 to 30.10; P value 0.0007; one RCT; 101 women.Results from the only randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing endometrial injury on the day of oocyte retrieval versus no injury, reported that this endometrial injury markedly decreased live birth (RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.69; P value 0.004; 156 women; low-quality evidence) and clinical pregnancy (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.71; P value 0.003; one RCT; 156 women; low-quality evidence)., Authors' Conclusions: Moderate-quality evidence indicates that endometrial injury performed between day 7 of the previous cycle and day 7 of the embryo transfer (ET) cycle is associated with an improvement in live birth and clinical pregnancy rates in women with more than two previous embryo transfers. There is no evidence of an effect on miscarriage, multiple pregnancy or bleeding. The procedure is mildly painful. Endometrial injury on the day of oocyte retrieval is associated with a reduction of clinical and ongoing pregnancy rates.Although current evidence suggests some benefit of endometrial injury, we need evidence from well-designed trials that avoid instrumentation of the uterus in the preceding three months, do not cause endometrial damage in the control group, stratify the results for women with and without recurrent implantation failure (RIF) and report live birth.

Background: Uterine fibroids (also known as leiomyomas) are the most common benign pelvic tumours among women. They may be asymptomatic, or may be associated with pelvic symptoms such as bleeding and pain. Medical treatment of this condition is limited and gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogues are the most effective agents. Long-term treatment with such agents, however, is restricted due to their adverse effects. The addition of other medications during treatment with GnRH analogues, a strategy known as add-back therapy, may limit these side effects. There is concern, however, that add-back therapy may also limit the efficacy of the GnRH analogues and that it may not be able to completely prevent their adverse effects., Objectives: To assess the short-term (within 12 months) effectiveness and safety of add-back therapy for women using GnRH analogues for uterine fibroids associated with excessive uterine bleeding, pelvic pain, or urinary symptoms., Search Methods: We searched electronic databases including the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group (MDSG) Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE, LILACS, CINAHL, PsycINFO; and electronic registries of ongoing trials including ClinicalTrials.gov, Current Controlled Trials, World Health Organization (WHO) International Clinical Trials Registry Platform. All searches were from database inception to 16 June 2014., Selection Criteria: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that included women with uterine fibroids experiencing irregular or intense uterine bleeding, cyclic or non-cyclic pelvic pain, or urinary symptoms, and that compared treatment with a GnRH analogue plus add-back therapy versus a GnRH analogue alone or combined with placebo were eligible for inclusion., Data Collection and Analysis: Two authors independently reviewed the identified titles and abstracts for potentially eligible records. Two review authors reviewed eligible studies and independently extracted data. Two authors independently assessed the studies' risk of bias. They assessed the quality of the evidence using GRADE criteria., Main Results: Fourteen RCTs were included in the review. Data were extracted from 12 studies (622 women). The primary outcome was quality of life (QoL).Add-back therapy with medroxyprogesterone (MPA): no studies reported QoL or uterine bleeding. There was no evidence of effect in relation to bone mass (standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.62 to 1.38, 1 study, 16 women, P = 0.45, low quality evidence) and MPA was associated with a larger uterine volume (mean difference (MD) 342.19 cm(3), 95% CI 77.58 to 606.80, 2 studies, 32 women, I(2) = 0%, low quality evidence).Tibolone: this was associated with a higher QoL but the estimate was imprecise and the effect could be clinically insignificant, small or large (SMD 0.47, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.85, 1 study, 110 women, P = 0.02, low quality evidence). It was also associated with a decreased loss of bone mass, which could be insignificant, small or moderate (SMD 0.36, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.7, 3 studies, 160 women, I(2) = 7%, moderate quality evidence). Tibolone may, however, have been associated with larger uterine volumes (MD 23.89 cm(3), 95% CI= 8.13 to 39.66, 6 studies, 365 women, I(2) = 0%, moderate quality evidence) and more uterine bleeding (results were not combined but three studies demonstrated greater bleeding with tibolone while two other studies demonstrated no bleeding in either group). Four studies (268 women; not pooled owing to extreme heterogeneity) reported a large benefit on vasomotor symptoms in the tibolone group.Raloxifene: there was no evidence of an effect on QoL (SMD 0.11, 95% CI -0.57 to 0.34, 1 study, 74 women, P = 0.62, low quality evidence), while there was a beneficial impact on bone mass (SMD 1.01, 95% CI 0.57 to 1.45, 1 study, 91 women, P < 0.00001, low quality evidence). There was no clear evidence of effect on uterine volume (MD 27.1 cm(3), 95% CI -17.94 to 72.14, 1 study, 91 women, P = 0.24, low quality evidence), uterine bleeding or severity of vasomotor symptoms (MD 0.2 hot flushes/day, 95% CI -0.34 to 0.74, 1 study, 91 women, P = 0.46, low quality evidence).Estriol: no studies reported QoL, uterine size, uterine bleeding or vasomotor symptoms. Add-back with estriol may have led to decreased loss of bone mass, from results of a single study (SMD 3.93, 95% CI 1.7 to 6.16, 1 study, 12 women, P = 0.0005, low quality evidence).Ipriflavone: no studies reported QoL, uterine size or uterine bleeding. Iproflavone was associated with decreased loss of bone mass in a single study (SMD 2.71, 95% CI 2.14 to 3.27, 1 study, 95 women, P < 0.00001, low quality evidence); there was no evidence of an effect on the rate of vasomotor symptoms (RR 0.67, 95% Cl 0.44 to 1.02, 1 study, 95 women, P = 0.06, low quality evidence).Conjugated estrogens: no studies reported QoL, uterine size, uterine bleeding or vasomotor symptoms. One study suggested that adding conjugated estrogens to GnRH analogues resulted in a larger decrease in uterine volume in the placebo group (MD 105.2 cm(3), 95% CI 27.65 to 182.75, 1 study, 27 women, P = 0.008, very low quality evidence).Nine of 12 studies were at high risk of bias in at least one domain, most commonly lack of blinding. All studies followed participants for a maximum of six months. This short-term follow-up is usually insufficient to observe any significant effect of the treatment on bone health (such as the occurrence of fractures), limiting the findings., Authors' Conclusions: There was low or moderate quality evidence that tibolone, raloxifene, estriol and ipriflavone help to preserve bone density and that MPA and tibolone may reduce vasomotor symptoms. Larger uterine volume was an adverse effect associated with some add-back therapies (MPA, tibolone and conjugated estrogens). For other comparisons, outcomes of interest were not reported or study findings were inconclusive.

Objectives: To summarize the current evidence on the effect of using ultrasound (US) guidance during embryo transfer (ET)., Methods: In this systematic review, we included randomized controlled trials examining the effect of the use of US guidance during ET; data from studies using the same catheter type in study arms were not pooled with the results from studies that used different catheter types., Results: Twenty-one studies were included in the quantitative analysis: 18 compared 'US guidance' with 'clinical touch', of which one was subsequently excluded from the quantitative meta-analysis owing to a lack of available data, three studies compared transvaginal US guidance with transabdominal US guidance, and one study compared 'hysterosonometry before ET' with US guidance. Comparison of the use of US guidance with clinical touch, in studies that used the same catheter type in the study arms, indicated a benefit of using US guidance during ET on the rates of live birth (relative risk (RR), 1.48 (95% CI, 1.16-1.87)), based on two studies involving 888 women with moderate-quality evidence, and on the rates of clinical pregnancy (RR, 1.32 (95% CI, 1.18-1.46)), based on 13 studies involving 3641 women with high-quality evidence. However, when comparing the use of US guidance with clinical touch in studies that used different catheter types, the results suggest that using US guidance during ET has no effect on the rates of reproductive outcome: live birth (RR, 0.99 (95% CI, 0.83-1.19)), based on one study involving 1649 women with moderate-quality evidence; clinical pregnancy (RR, 1.04 (95% CI, 0.89-1.21)), based on five studies involving 2949 women with moderate-quality evidence. The estimates for the rate of miscarriage and for the other identified comparisons were imprecise., Conclusions: The available evidence suggests that there is a benefit of using US guidance during ET. However, both US-guided transfer and clinical touch should be considered acceptable, as the benefit of US is not large and should be balanced against the increased cost and need to change the catheter type. More studies are required before conclusions can be drawn regarding the effect of other techniques on reproductive outcome., (Copyright © 2014 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background/aims: We aimed at assessing the efficacy of combined oral contraceptives (COC) in treating women with uterine leiomyomata and heavy menstrual bleeding (HMB), as well as their effect over quality of life (QoL), tumor size, and hemoglobin concentration., Methods: We searched various electronic databases and reference lists from all included studies. Randomized and nonrandomized controlled clinical trials were selected, and two trials were considered eligible - one randomized and one 'pseudo'-randomized., Results: COCs performed less well than levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine systems (LNG-IUSs) in controlling HMB, improving QoL, and improving the hemoglobin concentration, whereas the estimate was not sufficiently precise to define whether COCs were better than, equal to, or worse than LNG-IUSs in reducing tumor size. It must be stressed that these results are based on low-quality evidence, stemming from a single trial. Additionally, COCs were more effective than placebo in tumor size reduction, another conclusion based on another single study, considered as being at a high risk of bias and judged as very low-quality evidence., Conclusion: Evidence regarding the use of COCs as treatment for women with symptomatic fibroids is very scarce and of low quality, and we are very uncertain about the real efficacy of such treatment., (© 2015 S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Objective: To identify, appraise and summarize the available evidence regarding the effectiveness and safety of time-lapse embryo monitoring on the main outcomes of assisted reproductive techniques., Methods: In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we included only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing time-lapse embryo imaging with standard embryo monitoring. Our primary outcomes were live births (efficacy) and congenital abnormalities (safety). The secondary outcomes were clinical pregnancy, ongoing pregnancy and miscarriage., Results: Two RCTs were considered eligible, and their data were extracted and included in a meta-analysis. In both studies embryos were transferred at the blastocyst stage. No studies reported rates of live birth or congenital abnormalities. Our estimates were not sufficiently precise to identify whether time-lapse monitoring provided a small benefit, no effect or minor harm on rates of clinical pregnancy (relative risk (RR), 1.05 (95% CI, 0.80-1.38)) or ongoing pregnancy (RR, 1.05 (95% CI, 0.76-1.45)), based on two studies involving 138 women with moderate-quality evidence. Considering the available data, we were unable to determine whether the intervention poses substantial benefit, no effect or substantial harm in the risk of miscarriage (RR, 0.95 (95% CI, 0.30-2.99)), based on two studies involving 76 clinical pregnancies with low-quality evidence., Conclusions: Time-lapse embryo imaging is unlikely to have a large effect on the chance of achieving clinical and/or ongoing pregnancy when transferring embryos at the blastocyst stage. More studies are required to improve the quality of the current evidence and also to examine whether this intervention is useful when transferring embryos at the cleavage stage., (Copyright © 2014 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objective: To evaluate whether the presence or severity of endometriosis affects the outcome of assisted reproductive techniques (ART)., Methods: In this systematic review, all studies comparing the outcome of ART in women with and those without endometriosis, or at different stages of the disease, were considered eligible. We used either risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) and their 95%CIs for comparisons. The primary outcome was live birth; the secondary outcome was clinical pregnancy. Miscarriage and the number of oocytes retrieved were examined as additional outcomes., Results: We included 92 studies in the review and 78 in the meta-analysis: 20,167 women with endometriosis were compared with 121,931 women without endometriosis, and 1703 women with Stage-III/IV endometriosis were compared with 2227 women with Stage-I/II endometriosis. The following results were observed for the comparison of women with endometriosis vs women without endometriosis: live birth, RR = 0.99 (95%CI, 0.92-1.06); clinical pregnancy, RR = 0.95 (95%CI, 0.89-1.02); miscarriage, RR = 1.31 (95%CI, 1.07-1.59); number of oocytes retrieved, MD = -1.56 (95%CI, -2.05 to -1.08). The following results were observed for the comparison of women with Stage-III/IV vs Stage-I/II endometriosis: live birth, RR = 0.94 (95%CI, 0.80-1.11); clinical pregnancy, RR = 0.90 (95%CI, 0.82-1.00); miscarriage, RR = 0.99 (95%CI, 0.73-1.36); number of oocytes retrieved, MD = -1.03 (95%CI, -1.67 to -0.39)., Conclusions: Women with endometriosis undergoing ART have practically the same chance of achieving clinical pregnancy and live birth as do women with other causes of infertility. No relevant difference was observed in the chance of achieving clinical pregnancy and live birth following ART when comparing Stage-III/IV with Stage-I/II endometriosis. The quality of the evidence for the additional examined outcomes was very low, not allowing meaningful conclusions to be drawn., (Copyright © 2014 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of using cabergoline for reducing the risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS)., Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCTs)., Patients: Women submitted to controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) for assisted reproduction., Interventions: Cabergoline., Setting: Fertility centers., Main Outcome Measures: Moderate-severe OHSS, live birth, clinical pregnancy, number of retrieved oocytes, miscarriage, congenital abnormalities. Comparisons were performed with the use of risk ratios (RRs) or mean differences (MDs) and their respective 95% confidence intervals (CIs)., Result(s): Eight RCTs were considered to be eligible; data from seven studies could be extracted and included in the meta-analysis. Cabergoline reduces the risk of moderate-severe OHSS (RR 0.38, 95% CI 0.29-0.51, 7 studies, 858 women) and probably has no clinically relevant negative impact on clinical pregnancy (RR 1.02, 95% CI 0.78-1.34, 4 studies, 561 women) or on the number of retrieved oocytes (MD 1.15, 95% CI -0.76 to 3.07, 5 studies, 628 women). However, our estimates were imprecise for distinguishing between substantial harm, no effect, and substantial benefit considering live birth (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.71-1.48, 1 study, 200 women), and miscarriage (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.27 to 1.76, 3 studies, 194 pregnant women). No studies reported congenital abnormalities., Conclusion(s): Cabergoline reduces the occurrence of moderate-severe OHSS. Cabergoline is unlikely to have a clinically relevant negative impact on clinical pregnancy or on the number of retrieved oocytes. However, we are still uncertain of its impact on live birth, miscarriage, and congenital abnormalities., (Copyright © 2014 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of monitoring controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) using ultrasonography., Methods: We performed a search in April 2013 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Studies that compared different methods for monitoring COS, including ultrasound assessment of follicles (alone or combined with hormonal assessment), in at least one group were considered eligible., Results: The search retrieved 1515 records, six of which were eligible. Five studies were included that compared ultrasonography alone with ultrasonography and hormonal assessment (estradiol and/or progesterone) and one study compared 2D and 3D ultrasound monitoring. None of the included studies reported on live birth. Four of the five studies reported on clinical pregnancy (RR, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.78–1.16; n = 611); the confidence interval (CI) was somewhat wide, but allowed us to conclude that ultrasonography alone differs little from ultrasonography combined with hormonal assessment. Three studies reported on the number of oocytes retrieved (mean difference (MD), 0.8 oocytes; 95% CI, –0.4 to 2.0; n = 474); the CI was somewhat wide and did not permit us to conclude whether ultrasonography alone is better than or similar to ultrasonography and hormonal assessment for this outcome. All five studies reported on ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OR, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.47–2.25; n = 725) and only one study reported on miscarriage (RR, 0.37; 95% CI, 0.07–1.79; n = 45); for these two outcomes, the CI was very wide and did not permit us to conclude whether ultrasonography alone is better, similar or less effective than ultrasonography combined with hormonal assessment. For the study comparing 2D and 3D ultrasound, the reported outcomes were clinical pregnancy (RR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.58–1.73, n = 72) and the number of oocytes retrieved (MD, –0.4 oocytes; 95% CI, –3.6 to 2.9; n = 72); for both, the CI was very wide and did not permit us to conclude whether use of 3D ultrasound is better, similar or less effective than use of 2D ultrasound., Conclusions: Current evidence suggests that monitoring COS only with ultrasonography is unlikely to substantially alter the chances of achieving a clinical pregnancy and the number of oocytes retrieved is similar to that when monitoring with ultrasonography and hormonal assessment. For the other outcomes and comparisons, the available data are inconclusive. We believe that more studies evaluating the optimal procedure for monitoring COS are needed.

Objective: To examine the best evidence available regarding the effect of melatonin supplementation during controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) on the main assisted reproductive technology (ART) outcomes., Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials (RCT)., Setting: Not applicable., Patient(s): Women undergoing COS for ART., Intervention(s): Melatonin supplementation during COS for women undergoing ART., Main Outcome Measure(s): Live birth rate, clinical pregnancy rate, number of retrieved oocytes, miscarriage rate, ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) rate, and number of congenital abnormalities. Comparisons were performed using risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD)., Result(s): Five RCTs were considered eligible, and their data were extracted and included in a meta-analysis. No studies reported live-birth or congenital abnormalities. Our estimates were imprecise for distinguishing between no effect and benefit considering clinical pregnancy (RR, 1.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.98-1.50, five studies, 680 women, low quality-evidence) and the number of oocytes retrieved (MD, 0.6; 95% CI, -0.2-2.2, five studies, 680 women, low quality-evidence). Our estimates were imprecise for distinguishing among harm, no effect, and benefit considering miscarriage (RR, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.43-2.68, two studies, 143 clinical pregnancies, low quality-evidence) and interventions to reduce the risk of OHSS (RR,1.01; 95% CI, 0.33-3.08, one study, 358 women, low quality-evidence)., Conclusion(s): More studies investigating the role of melatonin supplementation are still needed before recommending its use in clinical practice., (Copyright © 2014 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Spatiotemporal image correlation can be used to acquire 3-dimensional power Doppler information across a single cardiac cycle. Assessment and comparison of the systolic and diastolic components of the data sets allow measurement of the recently introduced "volumetric pulsatility index" (vPI) through algorithms comparable with those used in 2-dimensional Doppler waveform analysis. The vPI could potentially overcome the dependency on certain machine settings, such as power, color gain, pulse repetition frequency, and attenuation, since these factors would affect the power Doppler signal equally throughout the cardiac cycle. The objective of this study was to compare the effect of color gain on the vascularization index (VI), vascularization-flow index (VFI), and vPI using an in vitro flow phantom model. We separated gains into 3 bands: -8 to -1 (no noise), -1 to +5 (low noise), and +5 to +8 (obvious noise). The vPI was determined from the 3-dimensional VI or VFI using the formula vPI = (maximum - minimum)/mean. Using no-noise gains, we observed that although the VI and VFI increased linearly with gain, the vPI was substantially less dependent on this adjustment. The VI and VFI continued to increase linearly with gain, whereas the vPI decreased slightly using low-noise gains. When gain was increased above the lower limit of obvious noise (+5), the VI and VFI increased noticeably, and there were marked reductions in both vPI values. We conclude that the vPI is less affected by changes in color gain than the VI and VFI at no-noise gains.

Objectives: To investigate the effect of endometrial scratching, performed during oral contraceptive pill (OCP) pretreatment, on reproductive outcome and on ultrasound markers of endometrial receptivity, and to assess the pain involved in the procedure, in unselected women undergoing assisted reproductive techniques (ART)., Methods: Women undergoing ART were randomly allocated to undergo either endometrial scratching with a pipelle de Cornier or a sham procedure, 7-14 days before starting controlled ovarian stimulation (COS). We evaluated subsequent rates of clinical pregnancy, live birth, implantation, miscarriage and multiple pregnancy. Pain during the procedure was evaluated using a 10-cm visual analog scale. Endometrial thickness and volume and three-dimensional power Doppler (3D-PD) indices (vascularization index (VI), flow index (FI) and vascularization flow index (VFI)) were assessed during COS when there was at least one follicle ≥ 17 mm in diameter., Results: We included 158 women. Endometrial scratching was associated with higher rates of live birth (41.8% vs 22.8%, P = 0.01) and clinical pregnancy (49.4% vs 29.1%, P = 0.01) and higher pain score (6.42 ± 2.35 cm vs 1.82 ± 1.52 cm, P < 0.001), endometrial VI (3.71 ± 1.77 vs 2.95 ± 1.56, P < 0.01) and VFI (0.97 ± 0.51 vs 0.76 ± 0.40, P < 0.01). There was no significant effect of endometrial scratching on rate of miscarriage (15.4% vs 21.7%, P = 0.53) or multiple pregnancy (22.5% vs 25.0%, P = 0.79), or on endometrial thickness (10.12 ± 1.55 mm vs 9.98 ± 1.62 mm, P = 0.59), endometrial volume (6.18 ± 1.63 cm(3) vs 6.01 ± 1.48 cm(3) , P = 0.51) or FI (26.12 ± 2.82 vs 25.91 ± 2.72, P = 0.65)., Conclusions: Endometrial scratching performed once, during OCP pretreatment 7-14 days before starting COS, increases the chance of live birth and clinical pregnancy, but might cause considerable pain., (Copyright © 2013 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)