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.
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.
Authors: Margareta D Pisarska; Jessica L Chan; Kate Lawrenson; Tania L Gonzalez; Erica T Wang Journal: J Clin Endocrinol Metab Date: 2019-06-01 Impact factor: 5.958
Authors: Hugh Taylor; Howard J Li; Sandra Carson; Valerie Flores; Lubna Pal; Jared Robbins; Nanette F Santoro; James H Segars; David Seifer; Hao Huang; Steven Young; Heping Zhang Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2022-06-17 Impact factor: 3.006
Authors: Mireia González-Comadran; Juan Enrique Schwarze; Fernando Zegers-Hochschild; Maria do Carmo B Souza; Ramon Carreras; Miguel Ángel Checa Journal: Reprod Biol Endocrinol Date: 2017-01-24 Impact factor: 5.211