BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study was to examine the impact of the presence of endometrial fluid (seen through ultrasound) on the outcome of IVF cycles and its association with the aetiology of infertility, in tubal and polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) cases specifically. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated the charts of all PCOS and tubal factor infertility patients that underwent IVF between June 1, 2001 and May 31, 2002. Twenty-four PCOS and 14 tubal factor infertility patients in whom endometrial fluid was detected were compared with 94 PCOS and 160 tubal factor patients whose stimulation cycles did not show any fluid collection. The main outcome measures were implantation and pregnancy rates. RESULTS: Implantation rates were lower in the tubal factor patients in the presence of endometrial fluid (6.12% and 21.4%, respectively) in comparison with all other tubal factor infertile patients in whom no fluid accumulation inside the cavity was detected. In PCOS cycles there was no significance in patients with presence of endometrial fluid in comparison with the all other PCOS cycles without any fluid accumulation. CONCLUSIONS: When fluid collection inside the endometrial cavity is first seen during ovarian stimulation of PCOS patients undergoing IVF, embryo transfer can be performed safely if the fluid has disappeared and not returned by the day of embryo transfer. However, in tubal factor cycles one should think of either cancellation of the cycle or cryopreservation of all embryos.
BACKGROUND: The aim of the present study was to examine the impact of the presence of endometrial fluid (seen through ultrasound) on the outcome of IVF cycles and its association with the aetiology of infertility, in tubal and polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) cases specifically. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated the charts of all PCOS and tubal factor infertilitypatients that underwent IVF between June 1, 2001 and May 31, 2002. Twenty-four PCOS and 14 tubal factor infertilitypatients in whom endometrial fluid was detected were compared with 94 PCOS and 160 tubal factor patients whose stimulation cycles did not show any fluid collection. The main outcome measures were implantation and pregnancy rates. RESULTS: Implantation rates were lower in the tubal factor patients in the presence of endometrial fluid (6.12% and 21.4%, respectively) in comparison with all other tubal factor infertilepatients in whom no fluid accumulation inside the cavity was detected. In PCOS cycles there was no significance in patients with presence of endometrial fluid in comparison with the all other PCOS cycles without any fluid accumulation. CONCLUSIONS: When fluid collection inside the endometrial cavity is first seen during ovarian stimulation of PCOSpatients undergoing IVF, embryo transfer can be performed safely if the fluid has disappeared and not returned by the day of embryo transfer. However, in tubal factor cycles one should think of either cancellation of the cycle or cryopreservation of all embryos.
Authors: George Patounakis; Meghan C Ozcan; Rebecca J Chason; John M Norian; Mark Payson; Alan H DeCherney; Belinda J Yauger Journal: Fertil Steril Date: 2016-04-14 Impact factor: 7.329
Authors: Mario Cavagna; Claudia G Petersen; Ana L Mauri; João Batista A Oliveira; Ricardo R L Baruffi; José G Franco Journal: JBRA Assist Reprod Date: 2014-12-27
Authors: Vanessa de Oliveira; Jennifer Schaefer; Basim Abu-Rafea; George A Vilos; Angelos G Vilos; Moshmi Bhattacharya; Sally Radovick; Andy V Babwah Journal: Mol Hum Reprod Date: 2020-03-26 Impact factor: 4.025