Literature DB >> 15044399

A multicentre randomized controlled trial of expectant management versus IVF in women with Fallopian tube patency.

E G Hughes1, M L Beecroft, V Wilkie, L Burville, P Claman, I Tummon, E Greenblatt, M Fluker, K Thorpe.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although observational studies suggest that IVF is more effective than no treatment for women with Fallopian tube patency, this has not been tested rigorously in a randomized controlled trial (RCT).
METHODS: Eligible consenting couples planning their first treatment cycle in five Canadian fertility clinics received either IVF, within 90 days of randomization, or a period of 90 days with no treatment. Random allocation was stratified by female age and sperm quality, and administered using numbered, opaque, sealed envelopes. Follow-up assessed live birth and associated morbidity.
RESULTS: Sixty-eight couples were randomized to a first cycle of IVF and 71 couples had 3 months without treatment. The live birth rates were 20/68 (29%) and 1/71 (1%), respectively. The single delivery in the untreated group was of twins, as were six of the 20 IVF deliveries (30%). An average of 2.0 embryos were transferred and no triplet pregnancies resulted. The relative likelihood of delivery after allocation to IVF was 20.9-fold higher than after allocation to no treatment [95% confidence interval (CI) 2.8-155]. The presence of abnormal sperm did not reduce this likelihood. Treating four women (95% CI 3-6) with one cycle of IVF is required to achieve a single additional birth.
CONCLUSIONS: This study provides a valid and up-to-date comparison for policy makers and patients as they make choices around IVF, accurately measuring and confirming a major benefit from treatment.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 15044399     DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deh209

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Reprod        ISSN: 0268-1161            Impact factor:   6.918


  8 in total

1.  Socially based discrimination against clinically appropriate care.

Authors:  Jeff Nisker
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2009-09-14       Impact factor: 8.262

2.  Most medical practices are not parachutes: a citation analysis of practices felt by biomedical authors to be analogous to parachutes.

Authors:  Michael J Hayes; Victoria Kaestner; Sham Mailankody; Vinay Prasad
Journal:  CMAJ Open       Date:  2018-01-15

3.  Fertility treatments and outcomes among couples seeking fertility care: data from a prospective fertility cohort in the United States.

Authors:  James F Smith; Michael L Eisenberg; Susan G Millstein; Robert D Nachtigall; Natalia Sadetsky; Marcelle I Cedars; Patricia P Katz
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2010-07-25       Impact factor: 7.329

Review 4.  In vitro fertilisation for unexplained subfertility.

Authors:  Zabeena Pandian; Ahmed Gibreel; Siladitya Bhattacharya
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2015-11-19

5.  Interventions for unexplained infertility: a systematic review and network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Rui Wang; Nora A Danhof; Raissa I Tjon-Kon-Fat; Marinus Jc Eijkemans; Patrick Mm Bossuyt; Monique H Mochtar; Fulco van der Veen; Siladitya Bhattacharya; Ben Willem J Mol; Madelon van Wely
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2019-09-05

6.  Male fertility and reduction in semen parameters: a single tertiary-care center experience.

Authors:  D Milardi; G Grande; D Sacchini; A L Astorri; G Pompa; A Giampietro; L De Marinis; A Pontecorvi; A G Spagnolo; R Marana
Journal:  Int J Endocrinol       Date:  2012-01-26       Impact factor: 3.257

7.  Irresponsibly Infertile? Obesity, Efficiency, and Exclusion from Treatment.

Authors:  Rebecca C H Brown
Journal:  Health Care Anal       Date:  2019-06

8.  IVF for unexplained subfertility; whom should we treat?

Authors:  R van Eekelen; N van Geloven; M van Wely; S Bhattacharya; F van der Veen; M J Eijkemans; D J McLernon
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2019-07-08       Impact factor: 6.353

  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.