OBJECTIVE: To compare pregnancy rates (PRs) obtained by transvaginal ultrasound (US)-guided GIFT with PRs from conventional laparoscopy-based GIFT. DESIGN: Retrospective case-controlled study. SETTING: Large, private assisted conception service. PATIENTS: Twenty consecutive cycles of transvaginal GIFT, each matched with three cycles of laparoscopic GIFT on the basis of patient age, number of previous unsuccessful attempts at GIFT, number of eggs transferred, and total number of eggs obtained. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Probability of clinical pregnancy. RESULTS: The PR from transvaginal GIFT was 20.0% (95% confidence limits 13% to 27%), compared with a PR from laparoscopic GIFT of 35.0% (23% to 50%). CONCLUSION: Transvaginal GIFT with present techniques seems to be less effective than laparoscopic GIFT, but it can be considered as a practical alternative to ovarian stimulation and intrauterine insemination and to peritoneal ovum-sperm transfer.
OBJECTIVE: To compare pregnancy rates (PRs) obtained by transvaginal ultrasound (US)-guided GIFT with PRs from conventional laparoscopy-based GIFT. DESIGN: Retrospective case-controlled study. SETTING: Large, private assisted conception service. PATIENTS: Twenty consecutive cycles of transvaginal GIFT, each matched with three cycles of laparoscopic GIFT on the basis of patient age, number of previous unsuccessful attempts at GIFT, number of eggs transferred, and total number of eggs obtained. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE: Probability of clinical pregnancy. RESULTS: The PR from transvaginal GIFT was 20.0% (95% confidence limits 13% to 27%), compared with a PR from laparoscopic GIFT of 35.0% (23% to 50%). CONCLUSION: Transvaginal GIFT with present techniques seems to be less effective than laparoscopic GIFT, but it can be considered as a practical alternative to ovarian stimulation and intrauterine insemination and to peritoneal ovum-sperm transfer.