Intra-uterine insemination for unexplained subfertility

Intrauterine insemination + controlled ovarian hyperstimulation versus in vitro fertilisation in unexplained infertility: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

IUI + COH is widely used in cases of unexplained infertility before resorting to IVF. Debate continues about what should be the first-line treatment for couples with unexplained infertility.

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review assessed the relative efficacy of IUI + COH compared with IVF in couples with unexplained infertility.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched Medline, Embase, CIHNL, Pscy Info, and Cochrane Library from 1980 to November 2019.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Only RCTs published articles in full text with female patients aged 18-43 years and diagnosed with unexplained infertility were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors reviewed citations from primary search independently and any disagreement was resolved by mutual discussion and consultation with a third author.

MAIN RESULT

In total, eight RCTs were included. The quality of evidence was moderate to low due to inconsistency across the trials and imprecision. The pooled result showed that IVF was associated with a statistically significant higher live birth rate (RR 1.53, 95% CI 1.01-2.32, P < 0.00001 I² = 86%) with no significant difference in multiple pregnancy rate or OHSS rate. Sensitivity analysis based on women's age and a history of previous IUI or IVF treatment showed no significant difference in the live birth rates (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.88-1.15, I² = 0%, 3 RCTs) in treatment-naïve women younger than 38 years. In women over 38 years, the live birth rates were significantly higher in the IVF group (RR 2.15, 95% CI 1.16-4.0, I² = 42%, 1 RCT).

CONCLUSION

Further research using a standardised treatment protocol and taking into account important prognostic variables and cumulative live birth rates from fresh IVF and all sibling frozen embryos is required to further guide clinical practice.

Clomiphene Citrate versus Recombinant FSH in intrauterine insemination cycles with mono- or bi-follicular development

Objective:

The present study aims to assess the success of controlled ovarian stimulation in intrauterine insemination cycles stimulated by recombinant-FSH and Clomiphene citrate for either mono- or bi-follicular development.

Methods:

We assessed 870 infertile patients treated with controlled ovarian stimulation in intrauterine insemination cycles at a university-based infertility clinic between January 2012 and December 2017. We compared the cycles stimulated by clomiphene citrate and recombinant-FSH in two set-ups; mono- and bi-follicular development. The main outcome measure was the clinical pregnancy rate per cycle.

Results:

The demographic and cycle parameters were similar between the groups, except for endometrial thickness on the day of hCG administration, which was higher in the recombinant-FSH group than the clomiphene citrate group. The overall clinical pregnancy rates in clomiphene citrate and recombinant-FSH groups were 9.8% and 10.3%, respectively (p=0.940). Regarding the entire cohort, clinical pregnancy was significantly higher in cases of bi-follicular development when compared to mono-follicular development (16.8% vs. 10.2%, respectively; p=0.009).

Conclusions:

Clomiphene citrate and recombinant-FSH have similar success rates in terms of clinical pregnancy, in either mono-follicular development or bi-follicular development. Clomiphene citrate and recombinant-FSH cycles resulted in comparable rates of bi-follicular development, which significantly increases clinical pregnancy rate. Clomiphene citrate and recombinant-FSH have similar success rates in terms of clinical pregnancy, in either mono-follicular development or bi-follicular development.

Effect of HCG-Triggered Ovulation on Pregnancy Outcomes in Intrauterine Insemination: An Analysis of 5,610 First IUI Natural Cycles With Donor Sperm in China

Objective: To evaluate the effect of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) trigger ovulation on pregnancy outcomes in natural IUI cycles with donor sperm. Methods: This retrospective cohort study included 5,610 first-natural IUI cycles with donor sperm in infertile couples during the period from January 2012 to December 2017. To control for other confounding factors, our analysis was restricted to normo-ovulatory women without tubal infertility. The main outcome measure was live birth rate; the secondary outcomes included rates of clinical pregnancy and miscarriage. Results: In the crude analysis, both the clinical pregnancy (27.40 vs. 22.73%; P = 0.001) and live birth rates (24.52 vs. 20.13%; P = 0.007) were significantly higher for the hCG group than for the spontaneous LH group. After adjustment for a number of confounding factors, the reproductive outcomes were still significantly worse for the spontaneous ovulatory group. Conclusions: Among women undergoing natural cycle IUI with donor sperm, hCG triggered ovulation for timing insemination offers beneficial impacts on both clinical pregnancy rates and live birth rates.

Low-dose human menopausal gonadotrophin versus natural cycles in intrauterine insemination for subfertile couples with regular menstruation

BACKGROUND

Women with irregular menstruation should be considered to benefit from the ovarian stimulation. However, most literature did not separate ovulatory disorders from normal menstrual cycles. Our purpose was to assess the superiority of ovarian mild stimulation compared with the natural cycle in IUI for subfertile couples when the women with regular menstruation.

METHODS

A retrospective study in a single medical center in which 2413 couples with 3573 IUI cycles were studied from 2013 to 2018. The results of IUI in natural cycles versus low-dose HMG induced cycles were analyzed.

RESULTS

For young women (age < 35 years) with normal menstrual cycle, HMG induced ovulation combined with IUI can improve clinical pregnancy outcome (13.55% in two follicular induced cycles vs. 7.23% in natural cycles, p < 0.01); even if only one follicle was induced, the clinical pregnancy rate was increased to 10.32% (p < 0.01). When two growth follicles were induced in HMG cycles, a remarkable improvement of the live birthrate (10.28% vs. 5.91% in natural cycles, p < 0.05) was noted. Simultaneously, twin pregnancy rates were increased to 20.69% (p < 0.01). Twin pregnancies showed significantly increased risk of both ectopic pregnancy and preterm birth (p = 0.00 for both). For advanced women (age ≥ 35 years) with regular menstrual cycle, ovulation induction didn't improve clinical pregnancy and live birthrates, while age was the only relevant factor.

CONCLUSIONS

Combining HMG induced ovulation and IUI can improve pregnancy outcome in young women with normal menstrual cycles. 1-2 follicles with diameter ≥ 14 mm served as the purpose of ovulation induction. Further, both twin and ectopic pregnancy rate in HMG cycles with two growth follicles were significantly higher than those in natural cycles were. Therefore, doctors must evaluate the risk before making choices and inform the patients to achieve the best results. For advanced women with normal menstrual cycles, natural IUI cycles were optional.

Intra-uterine insemination for unexplained subfertility

BACKGROUND

Intra-uterine insemination (IUI) is a widely-used fertility treatment for couples with unexplained subfertility. Although IUI is less invasive and less expensive than in vitro fertilisation (IVF), the safety of IUI in combination with ovarian hyperstimulation (OH) is debated. The main concern about IUI treatment with OH is the increase in multiple pregnancy rates.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether, for couples with unexplained subfertility, the live birth rate is improved following IUI treatment with or without OH compared to timed intercourse (TI) or expectant management with or without OH, or following IUI treatment with OH compared to IUI in a natural cycle.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility (CGF) Group trials register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and two trials registers up to 17 October 2019, together with reference checking and contact with study authors for missing or unpublished data.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing IUI with TI or expectant management, both in stimulated or natural cycles, or IUI in stimulated cycles with IUI in natural cycles in couples with unexplained subfertility.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently performed study selection, quality assessment and data extraction. Primary review outcomes were live birth rate and multiple pregnancy rate.

MAIN RESULTS

We include 15 trials with 2068 women. The evidence was of very low to moderate quality. The main limitation was very serious imprecision. IUI in a natural cycle versus timed intercourse or expectant management in a natural cycle It is uncertain whether treatment with IUI in a natural cycle improves live birth rate compared to treatment with expectant management in a natural cycle (odds ratio (OR) 1.60, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.92 to 2.78; 1 RCT, 334 women; low-quality evidence). If we assume the chance of a live birth with expectant management in a natural cycle to be 16%, that of IUI in a natural cycle would be between 15% and 34%. It is uncertain whether treatment with IUI in a natural cycle reduces multiple pregnancy rates compared to control (OR 0.50, 95% CI 0.04 to 5.53; 1 RCT, 334 women; low-quality evidence). IUI in a stimulated cycle versus timed intercourse or expectant management in a stimulated cycle It is uncertain whether treatment with IUI in a stimulated cycle improves live birth rates compared to treatment with TI in a stimulated cycle (OR 1.59, 95% CI 0.88 to 2.88; 2 RCTs, 208 women; I² = 72%; low-quality evidence). If we assume the chance of achieving a live birth with TI in a stimulated cycle was 26%, the chance with IUI in a stimulated cycle would be between 23% and 50%. It is uncertain whether treatment with IUI in a stimulated cycle reduces multiple pregnancy rates compared to control (OR 1.46, 95% CI 0.55 to 3.87; 4 RCTs, 316 women; I² = 0%; low-quality evidence). IUI in a stimulated cycle versus timed intercourse or expectant management in a natural cycle In couples with a low prediction score of natural conception, treatment with IUI combined with clomiphene citrate or letrozole probably results in a higher live birth rate compared to treatment with expectant management in a natural cycle (OR 4.48, 95% CI 2.00 to 10.01; 1 RCT; 201 women; moderate-quality evidence). If we assume the chance of a live birth with expectant management in a natural cycle was 9%, the chance of a live birth with IUI in a stimulated cycle would be between 17% and 50%. It is uncertain whether treatment with IUI in a stimulated cycle results in a lower multiple pregnancy rate compared to control (OR 3.01, 95% CI 0.47 to 19.28; 2 RCTs, 454 women; I² = 0%; low-quality evidence). IUI in a natural cycle versus timed intercourse or expectant management in a stimulated cycle Treatment with IUI in a natural cycle probably results in a higher cumulative live birth rate compared to treatment with expectant management in a stimulated cycle (OR 1.95, 95% CI 1.10 to 3.44; 1 RCT, 342 women: moderate-quality evidence). If we assume the chance of a live birth with expectant management in a stimulated cycle was 13%, the chance of a live birth with IUI in a natural cycle would be between 14% and 34%. It is uncertain whether treatment with IUI in a natural cycle results in a lower multiple pregnancy rate compared to control (OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.07 to 16.90; 1 RCT, 342 women; low-quality evidence). IUI in a stimulated cycle versus IUI in a natural cycle Treatment with IUI in a stimulated cycle may result in a higher cumulative live birth rate compared to treatment with IUI in a natural cycle (OR 2.07, 95% CI 1.22 to 3.50; 4 RCTs, 396 women; I² = 0%; low-quality evidence). If we assume the chance of a live birth with IUI in a natural cycle was 14%, the chance of a live birth with IUI in a stimulated cycle would be between 17% and 36%. It is uncertain whether treatment with IUI in a stimulated cycle results in a higher multiple pregnancy rate compared to control (OR 3.00, 95% CI 0.11 to 78.27; 2 RCTs, 65 women; low-quality evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Due to insufficient data, it is uncertain whether treatment with IUI with or without OH compared to timed intercourse or expectant management with or without OH improves cumulative live birth rates with acceptable multiple pregnancy rates in couples with unexplained subfertility. However, treatment with IUI with OH probably results in a higher cumulative live birth rate compared to expectant management without OH in couples with a low prediction score of natural conception. Similarly, treatment with IUI in a natural cycle probably results in a higher cumulative live birth rate compared to treatment with timed intercourse with OH. Treatment with IUI in a stimulated cycle may result in a higher cumulative live birth rate compared to treatment with IUI in a natural cycle.

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.

Interventions for unexplained infertility: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Clinical management for unexplained infertility includes expectant management as well as active treatments, including ovarian stimulation (OS), intrauterine insemination (IUI), OS-IUI,  and in vitro fertilisation (IVF) with or without intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI).Existing systematic reviews have conducted head-to-head comparisons of these interventions using pairwise meta-analyses. As this approach allows only the comparison of two interventions at a time and is contingent on the availability of appropriate primary evaluative studies, it is difficult to identify the best intervention in terms of effectiveness and safety. Network meta-analysis compares multiple treatments simultaneously by using both direct and indirect evidence and provides a hierarchy of these treatments, which can potentially better inform clinical decision-making.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of different approaches to clinical management (expectant management, OS, IUI, OS-IUI, and IVF/ICSI) in couples with unexplained infertility.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a systematic review and network meta-analysis of relevant randomised controlled trials (RCTs). We searched electronic databases including the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register of Controlled Trials, the Cochrane Central Register of Studies Online, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL, up to 6 September 2018, as well as reference lists, to identify eligible studies. We also searched trial registers for ongoing trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included RCTs comparing at least two of the following clinical management options in couples with unexplained infertility: expectant management, OS, IUI, OS-IUI, and IVF (or combined with ICSI).

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently screened titles and abstracts identified by the search strategy. We obtained the full texts of potentially eligible studies to assess eligibility and extracted data using standardised forms. The primary effectiveness outcome was a composite of cumulative live birth or ongoing pregnancy, and the primary safety outcome was multiple pregnancy. We performed a network meta-analysis within a random-effects multi-variate meta-analysis model. We presented treatment effects by using odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). For the network meta-analysis, we used Confidence in Network Meta-analysis (CINeMA) to evaluate the overall certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 27 RCTs (4349 couples) in this systematic review and 24 RCTs (3983 couples) in a subsequent network meta-analysis. Overall, the certainty of evidence was low to moderate: the main limitations were imprecision and/or heterogeneity.Ten RCTs including 2725 couples reported on live birth. Evidence of differences between OS, IUI, OS-IUI, or IVF/ICSI versus expectant management was insufficient (OR 1.01, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.98; low-certainty evidence; OR 1.21, 95% CI 0.61 to 2.43; low-certainty evidence; OR 1.61, 95% CI 0.88 to 2.94; low-certainty evidence; OR 1.88, 95 CI 0.81 to 4.38; low-certainty evidence). This suggests that if the chance of live birth following expectant management is assumed to be 17%, the chance following OS, IUI, OS-IUI, and IVF would be 9% to 28%, 11% to 33%, 15% to 37%, and 14% to 47%, respectively. When only including couples with poor prognosis of natural conception (3 trials, 725 couples) we found OS-IUI and IVF/ICSI increased live birth rate compared to expectant management (OR 4.48, 95% CI 2.00 to 10.1; moderate-certainty evidence; OR 4.99, 95 CI 2.07 to 12.04; moderate-certainty evidence), while there was insufficient evidence of a difference between IVF/ICSI and OS-IUI (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.60; low-certainty evidence).Eleven RCTs including 2564 couples reported on multiple pregnancy. Compared to expectant management/IUI, OS (OR 3.07, 95% CI 1.00 to 9.41; low-certainty evidence) and OS-IUI (OR 3.34 95% CI 1.09 to 10.29; moderate-certainty evidence) increased the odds of multiple pregnancy, and there was insufficient evidence of a difference between IVF/ICSI and expectant management/IUI (OR 2.66, 95% CI 0.68 to 10.43; low-certainty evidence). These findings suggest that if the chance of multiple pregnancy following expectant management or IUI is assumed to be 0.6%, the chance following OS, OS-IUI, and IVF/ICSI would be 0.6% to 5.0%, 0.6% to 5.4%, and 0.4% to 5.5%, respectively.Trial results show insufficient evidence of a difference between IVF/ICSI and OS-IUI for moderate/severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) (OR 2.50, 95% CI 0.92 to 6.76; 5 studies; 985 women; moderate-certainty evidence). This suggests that if the chance of moderate/severe OHSS following OS-IUI is assumed to be 1.1%, the chance following IVF/ICSI would be between 1.0% and 7.2%.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence of differences in live birth between expectant management and the other four interventions (OS, IUI, OS-IUI, and IVF/ICSI). Compared to expectant management/IUI, OS may increase the odds of multiple pregnancy, and OS-IUI probably increases the odds of multiple pregnancy. Evidence on differences between IVF/ICSI and expectant management for multiple pregnancy is insufficient, as is evidence of a difference for moderate or severe OHSS between IVF/ICSI and OS-IUI.

The management of unexplained infertility: an evidence-based guideline from the Canadian Fertility and Andrology Society

Unexplained infertility is a common diagnosis affecting as many as 50% of couples seeking infertility care. As a diagnosis of exclusion, its treatment remains largely empirical. Historically, a step-wise progression in treatment has been initiated with the least invasive, least expensive option followed by a gradual progression to therapies using assisted reproductive technology. In recent years there have been advocates for more rapid-progression IVF. This guideline from the Canadian Fertility and Andrology Society (CFAS) provides comprehensive, evidence-based recommendations for the treatment of unexplained infertility, including expectant management, laparoscopy, intrauterine insemination (IUI) alone, ovarian stimulation with oral agents or gonadotropins alone, ovarian stimulation + IUI, and IVF. The quality of supporting evidence for each recommendation is evaluated using the framework outlined by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health Care. This guideline recognizes that the therapeutic approach should be individualized taking into account patient age and duration of infertility, and emphasizes those strategies that are most likely to result in a healthy live birth.

The pregnancy outcomes of intrauterine insemination with husband's sperm in natural cycles versus ovulation stimulated cycles: A retrospective study

To compare the clinical outcomes of intrauterine insemination (IUI) with or without ovulation induction (OI), IUI cycles from January 2008 to December 2017 in Zhoushan Maternity and Child Healthcare Hospital were included, consisting of 455 natural cycles and 536 OI cycles. The overall clinical pregnancy rate did not differ between the two groups (P > 0.05). Stratified by OI medications such as clomiphene (CC), human menopausal gonadotropin (HMG) and follicle stimulating hormone (FSH), the pregnancy rates in HMG, CC, CC+HMG, and FSH/FSH+HMG groups were 11.70%, 13.58%, 15.95%, and 13.46%, respectively, but the difference was not significant compared with natural cycles (P > 0.05). Stratified by infertility etiology, the pregnancy rate was significantly higher in stimulated cycles than natural cycles with ovulation disorders (P < 0.01) and unexplained factors (P < 0.01) while it was significantly lower regarding cervical factors (P < 0.01), endometriosis (P < 0.05), male factor (P < 0.01) and other female factors. There was no strong difference of pregnancy rate for biparental causes (P > 0.05). Stratified by age category, women over 35 had higher pregnancy rate in stimulated cycles compared with natural cycles (18.75 vs. 12.24%; P < 0.05), while women under 35 had no significant difference of pregnancy rate between the two groups (13.65 vs 13.05%; P > 0.05). However, there was no significant difference between each ovarian stimulation group and natural cycle group regardless of the infertility causes or age categories. To conclude, IUI-OI could achieve a higher overall pregnancy rate for women over 35 and infertile patients with ovulation disorders and unexplained factors.

Growing body of evidence supports intrauterine insemination as first line treatment and rejects unfounded concerns about its efficacy, risks and cost effectiveness

IUI has been practiced for five decades but only three unconvincing trials attempted to demonstrate the superiority of IUI over sexual intercourse (SI). In the absence of evidence of its effectiveness, the National Institute for Clinical Excellence (NICE) recommended IVF over IUI after 2 years of unprotected SI. High-quality recent data in well-constructed studies suggest that biases against IUI procedures and in favour of IVF are invalid. It is unethical to continue to misinform patients and stakeholders. The well-constructed randomised controlled trials (RCT) show IUI procedure to be efficient, with minimal risk, and above all improved cost-effectiveness when compared to IVF for live birth. IUI as first-line treatment should be offered to most patients, while funding agencies and stakeholders need to be urgently informed of the cost-benefit in offering IUI. Fertility clinics, IVF interest groups, and regulatory bodies should amend their patient information and guidance to state that IUI should be the first line treatment and that IVF should be offered only when essential. Reappraising and promoting IUI based on evidence enhances patient autonomy, choices, and trust, while allowing the fertility industry to operate within an ethical and acceptable framework not seen as exploitative toward vulnerable patients.

Use of clomiphene citrate alone, urinary follicle-stimulating hormone alone, or both combined sequentially in patients with unexplained subfertility undergoing intrauterine insemination: A randomized trial

Objective:

To compare the successes of clomiphene citrate (CC) alone, pure human urinary follicle-stimulating hormone (uFSH) alone, and both combined sequentially in patients with unexplained subfertility couples undergoing intrauterine insemination (IUI).

Materials and Methods:

Patients aged 18-38 years who had a normal uterine cavity, at least one normal fallopian tube, and regular menses and were unable to conceive despite unprotected intercourse for at least 12 months were randomized to receive CC alone, uFSH alone, or sequential CC and uFSH before a single IUI. The primary outcomes were clinical pregnancy and live birth rates. The study was approved by the ethics committee of our institution.

Results:

A total of 135 patients were randomized, and 121 of these were able to complete the study. Of these, 30% (n=36) had CC alone, 34% (n=41) had uFSH alone, and 36% (n=44) had sequential CC and uFSH. The three groups did not significantly differ in terms of age, duration of infertility, hormone levels, and semen parameters. For CC alone, uFSH alone, and sequential CC plus uFSH groups, pregnancy rates were 8.3%, 17.1%, and 18.2%, respectively (p>0.05), and live birth rates were 8.3%, 12.1%, and 13.6%, respectively (p>0.05).

Conclusion:

In women with unexplained infertility, use of uFSH seemed to increase the success rate compared with CC alone. The sequential regime can significantly reduce the treatment cost if gonadotropin/IUI cycles are planned.

Are we choosing the correct FSH starting dose during controlled ovarian stimulation for intrauterine insemination cycles? Potential application of a nomogram based on woman's age and markers of ovarian reserve

PURPOSE

To evaluate the potential application of a nomogram based on woman's age and ovarian reserve markers as a tool to optimize the follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) starting dose in intrauterine insemination (IUI) cycles.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective analysis enrolling 179 infertile women undergoing controlled ovarian stimulation (COS), followed by IUI. Each woman received an FSH starting dose according to clinical decision. After collecting data about COS and IUI procedures, we calculated the FSH starting dose according to the nomogram. The main outcomes measured were women's baseline characteristics, COS, and clinical outcomes.

RESULTS

The FSH starting dose calculated by the nomogram was significantly lower than the one actually prescribed (p < 0.001), in only 14.8% of the cycles nomogram calculated a higher starting dose. When gonadotropin dose was decreased during COS, and similarly in case of hyper-response (more than two follicles ≥ 16 mm retrieved), the FSH starting dose calculated by the nomogram would have been lower in most of the cases (81.8% and 48.8%, respectively). Conversely, when gonadotropin dose was increased during COS and in case of low ovarian response (no follicle ≥ 16 mm retrieved), the FSH starting dose calculated by the nomogram would have been lower in most of the cases (64.7% and 100%, respectively); in these groups median anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) level was 5.62 ng/mL.

CONCLUSIONS

The application of this nomogram in IUI cycles would lead to a more tailored FSH starting dose and improved cost-effectiveness, although in PCOS women, particularly the ones with high AMH, it does not seem adequate.

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.

The SUPER study: protocol for a randomised controlled trial comparing follicle-stimulating hormone and clomiphene citrate for ovarian stimulation in intrauterine insemination

OBJECTIVE

To study the effectiveness of four cycles of intrauterine insemination (IUI) with ovarian stimulation (OS) by follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) or by clomiphene citrate (CC), and adherence to strict cancellation criteria.

SETTING

Randomised controlled trial among 22 secondary and tertiary fertility clinics in the Netherlands.

PARTICIPANTS

732 women from couples diagnosed with unexplained or mild male subfertility and an unfavourable prognosis according to the model of Hunault of natural conception.

INTERVENTIONS

Four cycles of IUI-OS within a time horizon of 6 months comparing FSH 75 IU with CC 100 mg. The primary outcome is ongoing pregnancy conceived within 6 months after randomisation, defined as a positive heartbeat at 12 weeks of gestation. Secondary outcomes are cancellation rates, number of cycles with a monofollicular or with multifollicular growth, number of follicles >14 mm at the time of ovulation triggering, time to ongoing pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, miscarriage, live birth and multiple pregnancy. We will also assess if biomarkers such as female age, body mass index, smoking status, antral follicle count and endometrial aspect and thickness can be used as treatment selection markers.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study has been approved by the Medical Ethical Committee of the Academic Medical Centre and from the Dutch Central Committee on Research involving Human Subjects (CCMO NL 43131-018-13). Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and presentations at international scientific meetings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NTR4057.

A New Dawn for Intrauterine Insemination: Efficient and Prudent Practice will Benefit Patients, the Fertility Industry and the Healthcare Bodies

This review addresses the misplaced facts about the IUI procedure within a lucrative fertility industry. Evidence suggests IUI must be a first-line treatment option for most couples except in cases of bilateral tubal blockage and severe oligozoospermia. We introduce the concept of using 'consecutive ejaculation' in men with subfertility and one which can radically alter the male infertility definition, thereby providing a new approach to examining and managing male factor infertility. The review also explores various aspects affecting the IUI procedure, its determinants of success, risks and areas for future improvements. Areas such as choice of patients, clinical management of patients, the type of stimulation regime, timing and the management of sperm usage have significant bearing to whether IUI will succeed. The paper asserts that IUI should be the first choice of fertility treatment.