Literature DB >> 9043900

The embryo versus endometrium controversy revisited as it relates to predicting pregnancy outcome in in-vitro fertilization-embryo transfer cycles.

L B Schwartz1, A S Chiu, M Courtney, L Krey, C Schmidt-Sarosi.   

Abstract

To evaluate embryonic and endometrial factors for their value in predicting pregnancy outcome in in-vitro fertilization (IVF) and embryo transfer, a retrospective data collection and prospective uterine artery colour Doppler imaging study was performed in a university-based IVF-embryo transfer programme setting. A total of 210 patients were included and grouped as follows: (I) IVF with controlled ovarian stimulation (214 cycles); (II) frozen-thaw cycle of autologous embryos (30 cycles); (III) oocyte donation, no cryopreservation (12 cycles); (IV) frozen-thaw cycle with embryos from donated oocytes (10 cycles). Embryo quality was significantly better in pregnant than non-pregnant cycles (group I, P = 0.0104; groups II-IV, P = 0.0418). The endometrial echo was significantly thicker in pregnant versus non-pregnant patients in group I (P = 0.0059), but not in groups II-IV (P = 0.741). Past uterine surgery or abnormalities had no effect on pregnancy outcome. There were no significant differences in mean uterine artery resistance index or peak systolic velocity in pregnant versus non-pregnant patients in groups II-IV. Thus, embryo quality is the most reliable predictor of pregnancy outcome. Endometrial measurements were significantly thicker in subsequently pregnant patients only in group I, where the endometrium reflects the hormonal environment. Doppler parameters were not useful in predicting pregnancy outcome.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  1997        PMID: 9043900     DOI: 10.1093/humrep/12.1.45

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


  7 in total

1.  Cumulative embryo score, not endometrial thickness, is best for pregnancy prediction in IVF.

Authors:  Cassie Laasch; Elizabeth Puscheck
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2004-02       Impact factor: 3.412

2.  Factors affecting assisted reproductive technology (ART) pregnancy rates: a multivariate analysis.

Authors:  Tiffany L Rhodes; Thomas P McCoy; H Lee Higdon; William R Boone
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 3.412

3.  Comparison of embryo quality between intracytoplasmic sperm injection and in vitro fertilization in sibling oocytes.

Authors:  R Yoeli; R Orvieto; J Ashkenazi; M Shelef; Z Ben-Rafael; I Bar-Hava
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2008-01-19       Impact factor: 3.412

4.  Prediction of pregnancy in IVF cycles on the fourth day of ovarian stimulation.

Authors:  J Carrera-Rotllan; L Estrada-García; J Sarquella-Ventura
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2007-06-28       Impact factor: 3.412

5.  Endometrial thickness on the day of the LH surge: an effective predictor of pregnancy outcomes after modified natural cycle-frozen blastocyst transfer.

Authors:  Sachie Onogi; Kenji Ezoe; Seiko Nishihara; Junichiro Fukuda; Tamotsu Kobayashi; Keiichi Kato
Journal:  Hum Reprod Open       Date:  2020-12-17

6.  Effects of steroid hormone levels on the ultrasound appearance of the preovulatory endometrium in controlled ovarian hyperstimulation cycles.

Authors:  Aytul Corbacioglu; Bulent Baysal
Journal:  Int J Fertil Steril       Date:  2012-03-20

7.  Alterations in uterine hemodynamics caused by uterine fibroids and their impact on in vitro fertilization outcomes.

Authors:  Jei-Won Moon; Chung-Hoon Kim; Jun-Bum Kim; Sung-Hoon Kim; Hee-Dong Chae; Byung-Moon Kang
Journal:  Clin Exp Reprod Med       Date:  2015-12-31
  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.