Intra-uterine insemination for male subfertility

Intrauterine insemination: prognostic factors

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the impact of possible maternal and paternal prognostic factors and ovarian stimulation protocols on clinical pregnancy and live birth rates in intrauterine insemination (IUI) cycles.

METHODS

Retrospective observational study of 341 IUI cycles performed from January 2016 to November 2020 at the Assisted Reproduction Service of the Clinics Hospital of the Ribeirão Preto Medical School, University of São Paulo. Clinical pregnancy and live birth rates and their potential prognostic factors were evaluated. Wilcoxon's non-parametric test was used to compare quantitative variables, and the chi-square test to compare qualitative variables, adopting a significance level of p<0.05. A logistic regression model was performed to verify which exploratory variables are predictive factors for pregnancy outcome.

RESULTS

The ovulation induction protocol using gonadotropins plus letrozole (p=0.0097; OR 4.3286, CI 1.3040 - 14.3684) and post-capacitation progressive sperm ≥ 5million/mL (p=0.0253) showed a statistically significant correlation with the live birth rate. Female and male age, etiology of infertility, obesity, multifollicular growth, endometrial thickness ≥ 7 mm, and time between human chorionic gonadotropin administration and IUI performance were not associated with the primary outcomes. In the group of patients with ideal characteristics (women aged< 40 years, BMI < 30 kg/m2, antral follicle count ≥ 5, partner aged< 45 years, and post-capacitation semen with progressive spermatozoa ≥ 5 million/mL), the rate of clinical pregnancy was 14.8%, while that of live birth, 9.9%.

CONCLUSIONS

In this study, the ovulation induction protocol with gonadotropins plus letrozole and post-capacitation progressive sperm ≥ 5 million/mL were the only variables that significantly correlated with intrauterine insemination success.

Exploring the pharmacological mechanism of Shengjing capsule on male infertility by a network pharmacology approach

Background

Shengjing capsule (SJC) is a traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) and has gained widespread clinical application for the treatment of male infertility (MI). However, the pharmacological mechanism of SJC against MI remains vague to date.

Method

The active ingredients of SJC and their targets were identified from the database, and MI-related genes were retrieved from several databases. Protein–protein interaction (PPI) data were obtained to construct the PPI networks. The candidate targets of SJC against MI were identified through topological analysis of the PPI network. Functional enrichment analysis of candidate targets was performed, and the key target genes were identified from the gene-pathway network.

Results

We identified 154 active ingredients and 314 human targets of SJC, as well as 564 MI-related genes. Eight pharmacological network diagrams illustrating the interactions among herbs, active ingredients, targets, and pathways, were constructed. The four dominating network maps included a compound-target network of SJC, a compound-anti-MI targets network, a candidate targets PPI network, a pathway-gene network, and a drug-key compounds-hub targets-pathways network. Systematic analysis indicated that the targets of SJC in the treatment of MI mainly involved RPS6, MAPK1, MAPK3, MDM2, and DDX5. Pathway enrichment analysis showed that SJC had the potential to impact multiple biological pathways, such as cancer-related pathways, viral/bacterial infection-related pathways, and signal transduction-related pathways.

Conclusion

Our results preliminarily revealed the pharmacological basis and molecular mechanism SJC in treating MI, but further experimental research is required to verify these findings.

The influence of graded levels of Cyathula prostrata (Linn.) Blume on semen quality characteristics of adult New Zealand white bucks

Cyathula prostrata (Linn.) Blume is a tropical herbal plant known for its important phytochemical contents and medicinal properties. But its impact on animal reproduction and fertility is yet to be fully established. Therefore, we tested the hypothesis that C. prostrata (Linn.) Blume will improve the semen quality characteristics of New Zealand White buck rabbit. Twenty-eight post-pubertal buck rabbits were used for the study. The animals were randomly assigned to four treatment groups (n = 7 per treatment) where they were fed either the control diet-0 g C. prostrata (Linn.) Blume or any of the three experimental diets containing the graded levels of C. prostrata (Linn.) Blume incorporated into rabbit pellets at 10, 20 or 30 g C. prostrata (Linn.) Blume per kg feed. The results showed that the semen volume and pH were not different between groups. Interestingly, sperm motility significantly decreased (P < 0.05) in a dose-dependent manner. Similarly, the sperm morphology also decreased in a dose-related fashion with 20 g (77.75 ± 1.31%) and 30 g (79.00 ± 2.20%) C. prostrata (Linn.) Blume being significantly (P < 0.05) lower compared with groups 0 g (88.50 ± 1.44%) and 10 g (87.50 ± 4.33%) C. prostrata (Linn.) Blume, respectively. In conclusion, the addition of C. prostrata (Linn.) Blume into the normal rabbit feeds had a positive effect on sperm count, but reduced sperm motility and morphology, and may be associated with spermatogenesis-related problems.

Does different subfertility etiology affect pregnancy rates in intrauterineinsemination cycles?

Background/aim

To investigate the relationship between subfertility etiologies and success rates in controlled ovarian stimulation and intrauterine insemination (COS–IUI) cycles.

Materials and methods

The medical records of 218 couples who applied to a university-based fertility center were analyzed retrospectively. Detailed infertility examination data and pregnancy outcomes were compared according to different subfertility etiologies. The study groups with regard to subfertility etiologies were minimal–mild endometriosis, unexplained infertility, and mild male infertility. The primary outcome measure was live birth rate.

Results

There were no statistically significant differences between the groups regarding demographics except for total motile sperm count. Live birth rates in the male infertility group were comparable to the endometriosis and unexpected infertility groups (6.6%, 11.9%, and 10.3%, respectively; P = 0.63).

Conclusion

The success rate of the mild male subfertility group following COS–IUI cycles for live birth rates was similar to those of the endometriosis and unexplained subfertility groups.

An Intrauterine Insemination Audit at Tertiary Care Hospital: A 4½ Years' Retrospective Analysis of 800 Intrauterine Insemination Cycles

BACKGROUND

There are many variables that may influence the success rates of intrauterine insemination (IUI) treatment. Therefore, a regular audit program is needed for planning effective infertility treatment and improving pregnancy outcomes.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES

The main objective of this study was to identify the crucial predicting factors that can influence the IUI success.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A retrospective analysis of 800 IUI cycles done from January, 2013 to August, 2017 in 651 couples with various etiologies of infertility. The common etiologies included female factor of ovulatory dysfunction, tubal, endocrinal, male factor, male and female factors combined, and unexplained factors. Ovulation induction was done either by clomiphene citrate (CC) alone or in combination of CC with gonadotropins or pure gonadotropins only. Human chorionic gonadotropin trigger was given when at least one dominant follicle measuring ≥18 mm with an endometrial thickness of >7 mm was obtained. IUI was done post 36 h of trigger. The double-density gradient method was the preferred method of sperm preparation.

RESULTS

In 800 cycles in corresponding 651 couples, the total outcome was 113 pregnancies (14.1%) per cycle with overall pregnancy rate (PR) per couple of 17.3%. The highest PR was observed in the patient with ovulatory dysfunction (21.2%), followed by patients with combined factor (15.1%) and male factor (14.7%). In the study, a higher PR was achieved in the female ≤25 years (18.9%) P < 0.04 with significant findings with duration of infertility ≤5 years (15.1%) having primary infertility (14.5%) with low body mass index <25 (14.1%). IUI success rate was highest in the first cycle (14.6%) followed by second cycle (14.0%) and third cycle (3.5%).

CONCLUSION

IUI audit enables the characterization of prognostic factors to achieve improved PR. This study identifies the factors that can predict improved pregnancy outcome in women age ≤25 years and endometrium thickness between 9 and 11 mm. We also recommend IUI as a first line of infertility treatment for couples in low-income setting provided the women age and duration of infertility are acceptably low.

Intrauterine Insemination: Current Place in Infertility Management

Infertility has become a significant problem worldwide. Multiple management options are available nowadays, which include intrauterine insemination (IUI), in vitro fertilisation (IVF), and intracytoplasmic sperm injection. IUI is one of the oldest and most popular methods. After >50 years since it was first used, IUI has evolved through various innovations but still struggles to find its place in infertility management. After the introduction of revised guidelines from the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) in 2013, there has been a surge in the use of IVF as a primary treatment modality. The aim of this evidence-based review is to highlight the factors associated with success of IUI and to find out whether IUI can be offered as a first-line treatment option for infertile couples.

Assisted reproductive technologies for male subfertility

BACKGROUND

Intra-uterine insemination (IUI), in vitro fertilisation (IVF) and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) are frequently used fertility treatments for couples with male subfertility. The use of these treatments has been subject of discussion. Knowledge on the effectiveness of fertility treatments for male subfertility with different grades of severity is limited. Possibly, couples are exposed to unnecessary or ineffective treatments on a large scale.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of different fertility treatments (expectant management, timed intercourse (TI), IUI, IVF and ICSI) for couples whose subfertility appears to be due to abnormal sperm parameters.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched for all publications that described randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of the treatment for male subfertility. We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and the National Research Register from inception to 14 April 2015, and web-based trial registers from January 1985 to April 2015. We applied no language restrictions. We checked all references in the identified trials and background papers and contacted authors to identify relevant published and unpublished data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs comparing different treatment options for male subfertility. These were expectant management, TI (with or without ovarian hyperstimulation (OH)), IUI (with or without OH), IVF and ICSI. We included only couples with abnormal sperm parameters.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected the studies, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. They resolved disagreements by discussion with the rest of the review authors. We performed statistical analyses in accordance with the guidelines for statistical analysis developed by The Cochrane Collaboration. The quality of the evidence was rated using the GRADE methods. Primary outcomes were live birth and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) per couple randomised.

MAIN RESULTS

The review included 10 RCTs (757 couples). The quality of the evidence was low or very low for all comparisons. The main limitations in the evidence were failure to describe study methods, serious imprecision and inconsistency. IUI versus TI (five RCTs)Two RCTs compared IUI with TI in natural cycles. There were no data on live birth or OHSS. We found no evidence of a difference in pregnancy rates (2 RCTs, 62 couples: odds ratio (OR) 4.57, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.21 to 102, very low quality evidence; there were no events in one of the studies).Three RCTs compared IUI with TI both in cycles with OH. We found no evidence of a difference in live birth rates (1 RCT, 81 couples: OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.30 to 2.59; low quality evidence) or pregnancy rates (3 RCTs, 202 couples: OR 1.51, 95% CI 0.74 to 3.07; I(2) = 11%, very low quality evidence). One RCT reported data on OHSS. None of the 62 women had OHSS.One RCT compared IUI in cycles with OH with TI in natural cycles. We found no evidence of a difference in live birth rates (1 RCT, 44 couples: OR 3.14, 95% CI 0.12 to 81.35; very low quality evidence). Data on OHSS were not available. IUI in cycles with OH versus IUI in natural cycles (five RCTs)We found no evidence of a difference in live birth rates (3 RCTs, 346 couples: OR 1.34, 95% CI 0.77 to 2.33; I(2) = 0%, very low quality evidence) and pregnancy rates (4 RCTs, 399 couples: OR 1.68, 95% CI 1.00 to 2.82; I(2) = 0%, very low quality evidence). There were no data on OHSS. IVF versus IUI in natural cycles or cycles with OH (two RCTs)We found no evidence of a difference in live birth rates between IVF versus IUI in natural cycles (1 RCT, 53 couples: OR 0.77, 95% CI 0.25 to 2.35; low quality evidence) or IVF versus IUI in cycles with OH (2 RCTs, 86 couples: OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.43 to 2.45; I(2) = 0%, very low quality evidence). One RCT reported data on OHSS. None of the women had OHSS.Overall, we found no evidence of a difference between any of the groups in rates of live birth, pregnancy or adverse events (multiple pregnancy, miscarriage). However, most of the evidence was very low quality.There were no studies on IUI in natural cycles versus TI in stimulated cycles, IVF versus TI, ICSI versus TI, ICSI versus IUI (with OH) or ICSI versus IVF.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We found insufficient evidence to determine whether there was any difference in safety and effectiveness between different treatments for male subfertility. More research is needed.

Efficacy of the motile sperm organelle morphology examination (MSOME) in predicting pregnancy after intrauterine insemination

BACKGROUND

Although the motile sperm organelle morphology examination (MSOME) was developed merely as a selection criterion, its application as a method for classifying sperm morphology may represent an improvement in the evaluation of semen quality. The aim of this study was to determine the prognostic value of normal sperm morphology using MSOME with regard to clinical pregnancy (CP) after intrauterine insemination (IUI).

METHODS

A total of 156 IUI cycles that were performed in 111 couples were prospectively analysed. Each subject received 75 IU of recombinant FSH every second day from the third day of the cycle. Beginning on the 10th day of the cycle, follicular development was monitored by vaginal ultrasound. When one or two follicles measuring at least 17 mm were observed, recombinant hCG was administered, and IUI was performed 12-14 h and 36-40 h after hCG treatment. Prior to the IUI procedure, sperm samples were analysed by MSOME at 8400× magnification using an inverted microscope that was equipped with DIC/Nomarski differential interference contrast optics. A minimum of 200 motile spermatozoa per semen sample were evaluated, and the percentage of normal spermatozoa in each sample was determined.

RESULTS

Pregnancy occurred in 34 IUI cycles (CP rate per cycle: 21.8%, per patient: 30.6%). Based on the MSOME criteria, a significantly higher percentage of normal spermatozoa was found in the group of men in which the IUI cycles resulted in pregnancy (2.6+/-3.1%) compared to the group that did not achieve pregnancy (1.2+/-1.7%; P = 0.019). Logistic regression showed that the percentage of normal cells in the MSOME was a determining factor for the likelihood of clinical pregnancy (OR: 1.28; 95% CI: 1.08 to 1.51; P = 0.003). The ROC curve revealed an area under the curve of 0.63 and an optimum cut-off point of 2% of normal sperm morphology. At this cut-off threshold, using the percentage of normal sperm morphology by MSOME to predict pregnancy was 50% sensitive with a 40% positive predictive value and 79% specificity with an 85% negative predictive value. The efficacy of using the percentage of normal sperm morphology by MSOME in predicting pregnancy was 65%.

CONCLUSIONS

The present findings support the use of high-magnification microscopy both for selecting spermatozoa and as a routine method for analysing semen before performing IUI.

Approaches to improve the diagnosis and management of infertility

BACKGROUND Recent advances in our understanding of the causes of infertility and of assisted reproductive technology (ART) have led to the development of complex diagnostic tools, prognostic models and treatment options. The Third Evian Annual Reproduction (EVAR) Workshop Meeting was held on 26-27 April 2008 to evaluate evidence supporting current approaches to the diagnosis and management of infertility and to identify areas for future research efforts. METHODS Specialist reproductive medicine clinicians and scientists delivered presentations based on published literature and ongoing research on patient work-up, ovarian stimulation and embryo quality assessment during ART. This report is based on the expert presentations and subsequent group discussions and was supplemented with publications from literature searches and the authors' knowledge. RESULTS It was agreed that single embryo transfer (SET) should be used with increasing frequency in cycles of ART. Continued improvements in cryopreservation techniques, which improve pregnancy rates using supernumerary frozen embryos, are expected to augment the global uptake of SET. Adaptation and personalization of fertility therapy may help to optimize efficacy and safety outcomes for individual patients. Prognostic modelling and personalized management strategies based on individual patient characteristics may prove to represent real progress towards improved treatment. However, at present, there is limited good-quality evidence to support the use of these individualized approaches. CONCLUSIONS Greater quality control and standardization of clinical and laboratory evaluations are required to optimize ART practices and improve individual patient outcomes. Well-designed, good-quality studies are required to drive improvements to the diagnosis and management of ART processes.

Single versus double intrauterine insemination (IUI) in stimulated cycles for subfertile couples

BACKGROUND

Intra uterine insemination (IUI), with or without controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH), is one of the treatment modalities offered to couples who have tried to conceive for at least one year (subfertile couples). It has been suggested that increasing the number of inseminations from one per cycle to two might increase the probability of conception.

OBJECTIVES

To determine if there is a difference in live birth or pregnancy rates for subfertile couples using single or double intrauterine insemination in stimulated cycles.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility group trials register (searched 8 July 2002), the Cochrane Controlled Trials Register (Cochrane Library Issue 1, 2002), MEDLINE (January 1966 to July 2002), EMBASE (January 1988 to July 2002), SCIENCE Direct Database (January 1966 to July 2002), Confsci (January 1973 to 15 July 2002), Pascal (January 1984 to July 2002) and reference lists of articles. We also contacted researchers in the field.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled, parallel trials of single versus double intrauterine inseminations in simulated cycles in subfertile couples.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently assessed trial quality and extracted data. Study authors were contacted for additional information.

MAIN RESULTS

Three studies involving 386 women were included. There was no data for the main outcome measure of live birth per couple or ongoing pregnancy rates, and none presented comparative data for adverse events. The results of two studies that reported pregnancy rate per couple did not show a significant effect of using double insemination (Peto OR 1.45, 95% CI 0.78-2.70).

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

Based on the results of pregnancy rate per couple of two trials, double intrauterine insemination showed no significant benefit over single intrauterine insemination in the treatment of subfertile couples with husband semen. There are no meaningful data to offer advice regarding clinical practice on the basis of this review.