A randomized clinical trial to evaluate optimal treatment for unexplained infertility: the fast track and standard treatment (FASTT) trial

IVF versus IUI with ovarian stimulation for unexplained infertility: a collaborative individual participant data meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

IVF and IUI with ovarian stimulation (IUI-OS) are widely used in managing unexplained infertility. IUI-OS is generally considered first-line therapy, followed by IVF only if IUI-OS is unsuccessful after several attempts. However, there is a growing interest in using IVF for immediate treatment because it is believed to lead to higher live birth rates and shorter time to pregnancy.

OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing IVF versus IUI-OS had varied study designs and findings. Some RCTs used complex algorithms to combine IVF and IUI-OS, while others had unequal follow-up time between arms or compared treatments on a per-cycle basis, which introduced biases. Comparing cumulative live birth rates of IVF and IUI-OS within a consistent time frame is necessary for a fair head-to-head comparison. Previous meta-analyses of RCTs did not consider the time it takes to achieve pregnancy, which is not possible using aggregate data. Individual participant data meta-analysis (IPD-MA) allows standardization of follow-up time in different trials and time-to-event analysis methods. We performed this IPD-MA to investigate if IVF increases cumulative live birth rate considering the time leading to pregnancy and reduces multiple pregnancy rate compared to IUI-OS in couples with unexplained infertility.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register to identify RCTs that completed data collection before June 2021. A search update was carried out in January 2023. RCTs that compared IVF/ICSI to IUI-OS in couples with unexplained infertility were eligible. We invited author groups of eligible studies to join the IPD-MA and share the deidentified IPD of their RCTs. IPD were checked and standardized before synthesis. The quality of evidence was assessed using the Risk of Bias 2 tool.

OUTCOMES

Of eight potentially eligible RCTs, two were considered awaiting classification. In the other six trials, four shared IPD of 934 women, of which 550 were allocated to IVF and 383 to IUI-OS. Because the interventions were unable to blind, two RCTs had a high risk of bias, one had some concerns, and one had a low risk of bias. Considering the time to pregnancy leading to live birth, the cumulative live birth rate was not significantly higher in IVF compared to that in IUI-OS (4 RCTs, 908 women, 50.3% versus 43.2%, hazard ratio 1.19, 95% CI 0.81-1.74, I2 = 42.4%). For the safety primary outcome, the rate of multiple pregnancy was not significantly lower in IVF than IUI-OS (3 RCTs, 890 women, 3.8% versus 5.2% of all couples randomized, odds ratio 0.78, 95% CI 0.41-1.50, I2 = 0.0%).

WIDER IMPLICATIONS

There is no robust evidence that in couples with unexplained infertility IVF achieves pregnancy leading to live birth faster than IUI-OS. IVF and IUI-OS are both viable options in terms of effectiveness and safety for managing unexplained infertility. The associated costs of interventions and the preference of couples need to be weighed in clinical decision-making.

Assessment of clinical pregnancies in up to eight ovarian stimulation with intrauterine insemination treatment cycles in those unable to proceed with in vitro fertilization

OBJECTIVE

To study the primary objective of clinical pregnancy (CP) rate per ovarian stimulation with intrauterine insemination (OS-IUI) treatment cycle in patients with repetitive cycles up to a maximum of 8 cycles.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort.

SETTING

Large fertility clinic.

PATIENTS

A total of 37,565 consecutive OS-IUI cycles from 18,509 patients were included in this study.

INTERVENTIONS

Those with anovulatory diagnoses, tubal factor infertility, male factor infertility, using donor sperm, canceled cycles, and those with missing data for either baseline characteristics or outcome were excluded. The CP rate was analyzed using generalized estimating equations and controlled for age, stimulation protocol, and body mass index.

MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES

Clinical pregnancy was defined as intrauterine gestation with fetal heartbeat visible on ultrasound.

RESULTS

A total of 37,565 consecutive OS-IUI cycles from 2002 through 2019 at a private practice facility were evaluated. All cycles met inclusion criteria and were used in generalized estimating equation modeling. Patients aged <35 years comprised 47.6% of the cohort. After adjustment for confounders, the mean predicted probability of CP for cycles one to 8 was 15.7% per cycle. The mean predicted probability of CP in aggregated data from cycles 2 to 4 was only 1.7% lower compared with cycle 1 as the referent (16.7% vs. 15.0%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 2nd: 0.88 {0.82, 0.95}, 3rd: 0.86 {0.79, 0.93}, 4th: 0.88 {0.79, 0.98}). However, the 15.0% mean predicted probability of CP for the second through the fourth cycle was concordant with the mean for all included cycles (15.7%). The mean predicted probability of CP of cycles 5 to 8 was not significantly different compared with the referent (16.7% vs. 16.1%, 95% CI 5th: 0.97 [0.85, 1.11], 6th: 0.93 [0.79, 1.10], 7th: 1.01 [0.81, 1.26], 8th: 1.01 [0.76, 1.34]). The modeling of consecutive cycles suggested that the adjusted cumulative predicted probability of CP from OS-IUI continues to increase with each of the 8 successive cycles.

CONCLUSION

Clinical pregnancy rates are satisfactory in up to 8 consecutive OS-IUI treatment cycles. These data are useful for counseling, especially in those patients for whom in vitro fertilization is not financially or ethically feasible.

Levothyroxine for a high-normal TSH in unexplained infertility

OBJECTIVE

Unexplained infertility affects nearly one-third of infertile couples. Women with unexplained infertility are more likely to have a high-normal thyroid-stimulating hormone level (TSH: 2.5-5 mIU/L) compared to women with severe male factor infertility. Practice guidelines vary on whether treatment should be initiated for TSH levels >2.5 mIU/L in women attempting conception because the effects of treating a high-normal TSH level with levothyroxine are not known. We evaluated conception and live birth rates in women with unexplained infertility and high-normal TSH levels.

DESIGN, PATIENTS AND MEASUREMENTS

Retrospective study including 96 women evaluated for unexplained infertility at a large academic medical centre between 1 January 2000 and 30 June 2017 with high-normal TSH (TSH: 2.5-5 mIU/L and within the normal range of the assay) who were prescribed (n = 31) or not prescribed (n = 65) levothyroxine. Conception and live birth rates were assessed.

RESULTS

The conception rate in the levothyroxine group was 100% compared to 90% in the untreated group (p = .086 unadjusted; p < .05 adjusted for age; p = .370 adjusted for TSH; p = .287 adjusted for age and TSH). The live birth rate was lower in the levothyroxine group (63%) compared to the untreated group (84%) (p = .05 unadjusted; p = .094 adjusted for age; p = .035 adjusted for TSH; p = .057 adjusted for age and TSH).

CONCLUSIONS

Women with unexplained infertility and high-normal TSH levels treated with levothyroxine had a higher rate of conception but lower live birth rate compared to untreated women, with the limitation of a small sample size. These findings assert the need for prospective, randomized studies to determine whether treatment with levothyroxine in women with unexplained infertility and high-normal TSH is beneficial.

Economics of Fertility Care

Family building is a human right. The high cost and lack of insurance coverage associated with fertility treatments in the United States have made treatment inaccessible for many patients. The universal uptake of "add-on" services has further contributed to high out-of-pocket costs. Expansion in access to infertility care has occurred in several states through implementation of insurance mandates, and more employers are offering fertility benefits to attract and retain employees. An understanding of the economic issues shaping fertility should inform future policies aimed at promoting evidence-based practices and improving access to care in the United States.

Unexplained subfertility: active or conservative management?

OBJECTIVES

Unexplained subfertility (UEI) describes a couple whose standard subfertility workout consider acceptable but unable to conceived.

METHODS

This retrospective study was conducted in the Advanced Reproductive Centre, UKM Hospital, Kuala Lumpur, from January 2016 to December 2019. The data of 268 UEI couples were obtained from the clinical database. Women aged 21-45 years old was included and further divided into four groups according to the female partner's age and subfertility duration: group A (age <35 years and subfertility <2 years), group B (age <35 years and subfertility >2 years), group C (age >35 years and subfertility <2 years), and group D (age >35 years and subfertility <2 years). All statistical analyses were performed using SPSS 22.0 for Windows.

RESULTS

A total of 255 cases were included in this study. The mean age of the women was 32.9 ± 4.04 years, and the mean subfertility duration was 5.04 ± 2.9 years. A total of 51 (20 %) cases underwent timed sexual intercourse, 147 (57.6 %) cases had intrauterine insemination (IUI), whereas 57 (22.4 %) cases opted for in vitro fertilization (IVF). A total of 204 cases underwent active management (IUI/IVF), which showed a significant difference (p<0.05). Out of eight clinical pregnancies, half of them were from group B.

CONCLUSIONS

Active management in younger women with a shorter subfertility duration revealed a better pregnancy outcome. Otherwise, individualized treatment should be considered in selecting a suitable treatment plan.

The definition of unexplained infertility: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

There is no consensus on tests required to either diagnose unexplained infertility or use for research inclusion criteria. This leads to heterogeneity and bias affecting meta-analysis and best practice advice.

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review analyses the variability of inclusion criteria applied to couples with unexplained infertility. We propose standardised criteria for use both in future research studies and clinical diagnosis.

SEARCH STRATEGY

CINAHL and MEDLINE online databases were searched up to November 2022 for all published studies recruiting couples with unexplained infertility, available in full text in the English language.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were collected in an Excel spreadsheet. Results were analysed per category and methodology or reference range.

MAIN RESULTS

Of 375 relevant studies, only 258 defined their inclusion criteria. The most commonly applied inclusion criteria were semen analysis, tubal patency and assessment of ovulation in 220 (85%), 232 (90%), 205 (79.5%) respectively. Only 87/220 (39.5%) studies reporting semen analysis used the World Health Organization (WHO) limits. Tubal patency was accepted if bilateral in 145/232 (62.5%) and if unilateral in 24/232 (10.3%). Ovulation was assessed using mid-luteal serum progesterone in 115/205 (56.1%) and by a history of regular cycles in 87/205 (42.4%). Other criteria, including uterine cavity assessment and hormone profile, were applied in less than 50% of included studies.

CONCLUSIONS

This review highlights the heterogeneity among studied populations with unexplained infertility. Development and application of internationally accepted criteria will improve the quality of research and future clinical care.

Should IUI replace IVF as first-line treatment for unexplained infertility? A literature review

BACKGROUND

Unexplained infertility accounts for 25% of infertility causes in the UK. Active intervention methods, such as intrauterine insemination (IUI) or in vitro fertilisation (IVF), are often sought. Despite the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) recommending IVF for unexplained infertility, this recommendation has generated an ongoing debate, with few fertility clinics discontinuing the use of IUI as the first-line management of choice. In contrast to NICE, recent guidance released from the European Society for Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) in August 2023 supports the use of IUI as first-line. High-quality evidence behind such interventions is lacking, with current literature providing conflicting results.

AIMS

This review aims to provide a literature overview exploring whether IUI or IVF should be used as first-line treatment for couples with unexplained infertility, in the context of current guidelines.

METHODS

The primary outcome used to assess efficacy of both treatment methods is live birth (LB) rates. Secondary outcomes used are clinical pregnancy (CP) and ongoing pregnancy (OP) rates. A comprehensive literature search of 4 databases: Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, Maternity & Infant Care and the Cochrane Library were searched in January 2022. Upon removal of duplications, abstract screening, and full-text screening, a total of 34 papers were selected.

DISCUSSION/CONCLUSION

This review highlights a large discrepancy in the literature when examining pregnancy outcomes of IUI and IVF treatments. Evidence shows IUI increases LB and CP rates 3-fold compared to expectant management. Literature comparing IUI to IVF is less certain. The review finds the literature implies IVF should be used for first-line management but the paucity of high-quality randomised controlled trials (RCTs), coupled with heterogeneity of the identified studies and a lack of research amongst women > 40 years warrants the need for further large RCTs. The decision to offer IUI with ovarian stimulation (IUI-OS) or IVF should be based upon patient prognostic factors. We suggest that IUI-OS could be offered as first-line treatment for unexplained infertility for women < 38 years, with good prognosis, and IVF could be offered first to those > 38 years. Patients should be appropriately counselled to enable informed decision making.

In vitro fertilisation for unexplained subfertility

BACKGROUND

In vitro fertilisation (IVF) is a treatment for unexplained subfertility but is invasive, expensive, and associated with risks.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of IVF versus expectant management, unstimulated intrauterine insemination (IUI), and IUI with ovarian stimulation using gonadotropins, clomiphene citrate (CC), or letrozole in improving pregnancy outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched following databases from inception to November 2021, with no language restriction: Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL. We searched reference lists of articles and conference abstracts.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing effectiveness of IVF for unexplained subfertility with expectant management, unstimulated IUI, and stimulated IUI.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We followed standard Cochrane methods.

MAIN RESULTS

IVF versus expectant management (two RCTs) We are uncertain whether IVF improves live birth rate (LBR) and clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) compared to expectant management (odds ratio (OR) 22.0, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.56 to 189.37; 1 RCT; 51 women; very low-quality evidence; OR 3.24, 95% CI 1.07 to 9.8; 2 RCTs; 86 women; I2 = 80%; very low-quality evidence). Adverse effects were not reported. Assuming 4% LBR and 12% CPR with expectant management, these would be 8.8% to 9% and 13% to 58% with IVF. IVF versus unstimulated IUI (two RCTs) IVF may improve LBR compared to unstimulated IUI (OR 2.47, 95% CI 1.19 to 5.12; 2 RCTs; 156 women; I2 = 60%; low-quality evidence). We are uncertain whether there is a difference between IVF and IUI for multiple pregnancy rate (MPR) (OR 1.03, 95% CI 0.04 to 27.29; 1 RCT; 43 women; very low-quality evidence) and miscarriage rate (OR 1.72, 95% CI 0.14 to 21.25; 1 RCT; 43 women; very low-quality evidence). No study reported ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). Assuming 16% LBR, 3% MPR, and 6% miscarriage rate with unstimulated IUI, these outcomes would be 18.5% to 49%, 0.1% to 46%, and 0.9% to 58% with IVF. IVF versus IUI + ovarian stimulation with gonadotropins (6 RCTs), CC (1 RCT), or letrozole (no RCTs) Stratified analysis was based on pretreatment status. Treatment-naive women There may be little or no difference in LBR between IVF and IUI + gonadotropins (1 IVF to 2 to 3 IUI cycles: OR 1.19, 95% CI 0.87 to 1.61; 3 RCTs; 731 women; I2 = 0%; low-quality evidence; 1 IVF to 1 IUI cycle: OR 1.63, 95% CI 0.91 to 2.92; 2 RCTs; 221 women; I2 = 54%; low-quality evidence); or between IVF and IUI + CC (OR 2.51, 95% CI 0.96 to 6.55; 1 RCT; 103 women; low-quality evidence). Assuming 42% LBR with IUI + gonadotropins (1 IVF to 2 to 3 IUI cycles) and 26% LBR with IUI + gonadotropins (1 IVF to 1 IUI cycle), LBR would be 39% to 54% and 24% to 51% with IVF. Assuming 15% LBR with IUI + CC, LBR would be 15% to 54% with IVF. There may be little or no difference in CPR between IVF and IUI + gonadotropins (1 IVF to 2 to 3 IUI cycles: OR 1.17, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.59; 3 RCTs; 731 women; I2 = 0%; low-quality evidence; 1 IVF to 1 IUI cycle: OR 4.59, 95% CI 1.86 to 11.35; 1 RCT; 103 women; low-quality evidence); or between IVF and IUI + CC (OR 3.58, 95% CI 1.51 to 8.49; 1 RCT; 103 women; low-quality evidence). Assuming 48% CPR with IUI + gonadotropins (1 IVF to 2 to 3 IUI cycles) and 17% with IUI + gonadotropins (1 IVF to 1 IUI cycle), CPR would be 44% to 60% and 28% to 70% with IVF. Assuming 21% CPR with IUI + CC, CPR would be 29% to 69% with IVF. There may be little or no difference in multiple pregnancy rate (MPR) between IVF and IUI + gonadotropins (1 IVF to 2 to 3 IUI cycles: OR 0.82, 95% CI 0.38 to 1.77; 3 RCTs; 731 women; I2 = 0%; low-quality evidence; 1 IVF to 1 IUI cycle: OR 0.76, 95% CI 0.36 to 1.58; 2 RCTs; 221 women; I2 = 0%; low-quality evidence); or between IVF and IUI + CC (OR 0.64, 95% CI 0.17 to 2.41; 1 RCT; 102 women; low-quality evidence). We are uncertain if there is a difference in OHSS between IVF and IUI + gonadotropins with 1 IVF to 2 to 3 IUI cycles (OR 6.86, 95% CI 0.35 to 134.59; 1 RCT; 207 women; very low-quality evidence); and there may be little or no difference in OHSS with 1 IVF to 1 IUI cycle (OR 1.22, 95% CI 0.36 to 4.16; 2 RCTs; 221 women; I2 = 0%; low-quality evidence). There may be little or no difference between IVF and IUI + CC (OR 1.53, 95% CI 0.24 to 9.57; 1 RCT; 102 women; low-quality evidence). We are uncertain if there is a difference in miscarriage rate between IVF and IUI + gonadotropins with 1 IVF to 2 to 3 IUI cycles (OR 0.31, 95% CI 0.03 to 3.04; 1 RCT; 207 women; very low-quality evidence); and there may be little or no difference with 1 IVF to 1 IUI cycle (OR 1.16, 95% CI 0.44 to 3.02; 1 RCT; 103 women; low-quality evidence). There may be little or no difference between IVF and IUI + CC (OR 1.48, 95% CI 0.54 to 4.05; 1 RCT; 102 women; low-quality evidence). In women pretreated with IUI + CC IVF may improve LBR compared with IUI + gonadotropins (OR 3.90, 95% CI 2.32 to 6.57; 1 RCT; 280 women; low-quality evidence). Assuming 22% LBR with IUI + gonadotropins, LBR would be 39% to 65% with IVF. IVF may improve CPR compared with IUI + gonadotropins (OR 14.13, 95% CI 7.57 to 26.38; 1 RCT; 280 women; low-quality evidence). Assuming 30% CPR with IUI + gonadotropins, CPR would be 76% to 92% with IVF.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

IVF may improve LBR over unstimulated IUI. Data should be interpreted with caution as overall evidence quality was low.

The impact of prolonged, maternal iodine exposure in early gestation on neonatal thyroid function

CONTEXT

Hysterosalpingography (HSG) using oil-soluble contrast medium (OSCM) improves pregnancy rates but results in severe and persistent iodine excess, potentially impacting the fetus and neonate.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the incidence of thyroid dysfunction in newborns conceived within six months of OSCM HSG.

DESIGN

Offspring study of a prospective cohort of women who underwent OSCM HSG.

SETTING

Auckland region, New Zealand (2020-2022).

PARTICIPANTS

Offspring from the SELFI (Safety and Efficacy of Lipiodol in Fertility Investigations) study cohort (n=57).

MEASUREMENTS

All newborns had a dried blood spot card for TSH measurement 48 hours after birth as part of New Zealand's Newborn Metabolic Screening Programme. Forty-one neonates also had a heel prick serum sample at one week to measure thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH), free thyroxine (FT4), and free triiodothyronine (FT3). Maternal urine iodine concentration (UIC) and TSH in the six months after OSCM HSG were retrieved from the SELFI study for analyses.

PRIMARY OUTCOME

Incidence of hypothyroidism in the neonatal period.

RESULTS

There was no evidence of primary hypothyroidism on newborn screening (TSH 2-10 mIU/L). All neonates tested at one week had normal serum TSH, FT4, and FT3 levels. However, increasing maternal peak UIC levels during pregnancy were associated with lower TSH levels (p= 0.006), although also associated with lower FT4 levels (p=0.032).

CONCLUSIONS

While pre-conceptional OSCM HSG in women did not result in neonatal hypothyroidism, gestational iodine excess was associated with a paradoxical lowering of neonatal TSH levels despite lower FT4 levels. These changes likely reflect alterations in deiodinase activity in the fetal hypothalamic-pituitary axis from iodine excess.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

https://anzctr.org.au/Trial/Registration/TrialReview.aspx?ACTRN=12620000738921, identifier 12620000738921.

Effect of advanced parental age on pregnancy outcome and offspring health

PURPOSE

Fertility at advanced age has become increasingly common, but the aging of parents may adversely affect the maturation of gametes and the development of embryos, and therefore the effects of aging are likely to be transmitted to the next generation. This article reviewed the studies in this field in recent years.

METHODS

We searched the relevant literature in recent years with the keywords of "advanced maternal/paternal age" combined with "adverse pregnancy outcome" or "birth defect" in the PubMed database and classified the effects of parental advanced age on pregnancy outcomes and birth defects. Related studies on the effect of advanced age on birth defects were classified as chromosomal abnormalities, neurological and psychiatric disorders, and other systemic diseases. The effect of assisted reproduction technology (ART) on fertility in advanced age was also discussed.

RESULTS

Differences in the definition of the range of advanced age and other confounding factors among studies were excluded, most studies believed that advanced parental age would affect pregnancy outcomes and birth defects in offspring.

CONCLUSION

To some extent, advanced parental age caused adverse pregnancy outcomes and birth defects. The occurrence of these results was related to the molecular genetic changes caused by aging, such as gene mutations, epigenetic variations, etc. Any etiology of adverse pregnancy outcomes and birth defects related to aging might be more than one. The detrimental effect of advanced age can be corrected to some extent by ART.

Ovulation induction and intrauterine insemination in women of advanced reproductive age: a systematic review of the literature

PURPOSE

The objective of this review is to define live birth rate (LBR) and clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) for women ≥ 40 undergoing ovulation induction (OI)/intrauterine insemination (IUI).

METHODS

A systematic review was performed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines using PubMed and Google Scholar. The primary and secondary outcomes of interest were LBR and CPR, respectively.

RESULTS

There were 636 studies screened of which 42 were included. In 8 studies which provided LBR for partner sperm, LBR/cycle ranged from 0 to 8.5% with majority being ≤ 4%. Cumulative LBR was 3.6 to 7.1% over 6 cycles with the majority of pregnancies in the first 4. In the four studies providing LBR for donor sperm cycles, LBR/cycle ranged from 3 to 7% with cumulative LBR of 12 to 24% over 6 cycles. The majority of pregnancies occurred in the first 6 cycles. There were three studies with LBR or CPR/cycle ≥ 1% for women ≥ 43. No studies provided data above this range for women ≥ 45. In 4 studies which compared OI/IUI and IVF, the LBR from IVF was 9.2 to 22% per cycle. In 7 studies which compared outcomes by stimulation protocol, no significant differences were seen.

CONCLUSION

For women ≥ 40 using homologous sperm, the highest probability of live birth is via IVF. However, if IVF is not an option, OI/IUI may be considered for up to 4 cycles in those using partner sperm or 6 cycles with donor sperm. For women > 45, OI/IUI is likely futile but a limited trial may be considered for psychological benefit while encouraging consideration of donor oocyte IVF or adoption. Use of gonadotropins does not appear to be more effective than oral agents in this age group.

Prevention of multiple pregnancies in gonadotropin-insemination cycles

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Although elective single embryo transfer has significantly reduced, the rate of multiple pregnancy in IVF cycles, this rate is still relatively high in gonadotropin-insemination cycles. Patients who fail to ovulate or to conceive with oral agents and have constraints for IVF are usually candidates for gonadotropin injections. The current review article provides an up-to-date summation of the different strategies that can be adopted to reduce the risk of multiple pregnancies in gonadotropin-stimulated intrauterine insemination cycles.

RECENT FINDINGS

Gonadotropin-insemination treatments should be used judiciously by experienced providers. One should always start with the lowest effective gonadotropin dose (∼37.5 IU), monitor closely the ovarian response, and consider cycle cancellation or conversion to IVF whenever a high response is encountered. Therefore, every infertility practice should define its own cancellation and 'rescue IVF' criteria depending on the number of mature ovarian follicles and the age of the female partner.

SUMMARY

These preventive measures amongst others should mitigate the risk of multiple pregnancies that can arise from gonadotropin-insemination cycles.

Fertility treatments and the risk of preterm birth among women with subfertility: a linked-data retrospective cohort study

Background

In vitro fertilization (IVF) births contribute to a considerable proportion of preterm birth (PTB) each year. However, there is no formal surveillance of adverse perinatal outcomes for less invasive fertility treatments. The study objective was to describe associations between fertility treatment (in vitro fertilization, intrauterine insemination, usually with ovulation drugs (IUI), or ovulation drugs alone) and preterm birth, compared to no treatment in subfertile women.

Methods

The Fertility Experiences Study (FES) is a retrospective cohort study conducted at the University of Utah between April 2010 and September 2012. Women with a history of primary subfertility self-reported treatment data via survey and interviews. Participant data were linked to birth certificates and fetal death records to asses for perinatal outcomes, particularly preterm birth.

Results

A total 487 birth certificates and 3 fetal death records were linked as first births for study participants who completed questionnaires. Among linked births, 19% had a PTB. After adjustment for maternal age, paternal age, maternal education, annual income, religious affiliation, female or male fertility diagnosis, and duration of subfertility, the odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals (CI) for PTB were 2.17 (CI 0.99, 4.75) for births conceived using ovulation drugs, 3.17 (CI 1.4, 7.19) for neonates conceived using IUI and 4.24 (CI 2.05, 8.77) for neonates conceived by IVF, compared to women with subfertility who used no treatment during the month of conception. A reported diagnosis of female factor infertility increased the adjusted odds of having a PTB 2.99 (CI 1.5, 5.97). Duration of pregnancy attempt was not independently associated with PTB. In restricting analyses to singleton gestation, odds ratios were not significant for any type of treatment.

Conclusion

IVF, IUI, and ovulation drugs were all associated with a higher incidence of preterm birth and low birth weight, predominantly related to multiple gestation births.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12978-022-01363-4.

Infertility treatments such as in vitro fertilization are associated with preterm birth, but less is known about how other less invasive treatments contribute to preterm birth. This study compares different types of fertility treatments and rates of preterm birth with women who are also struggling with infertility but did not use fertility treatments at the time of their pregnancy. 490 women were recruited at the University of Utah between 2010 and 2012. Participants were asked to complete a survey and were linked to birth certificate and fetal death certificate data. Women who used in vitro fertilization were 4.24 times more likely to have a preterm birth than those who used no treatment. Use of intrauterine insemination were 3.17 times more likely to have a preterm birth than those who used no treatment at time of conception. Ovulation stimulating drugs were 2.17 times more likely to have a preterm birth. Having female factor infertility was also associated with higher odds of having preterm birth. For those who are having trouble conceiving, trying less invasive treatments to achieve pregnancy might reduce their risk of preterm birth.

Multiple gestation associated with infertility therapy: a committee opinion

This Committee Opinion provides practitioners with suggestions to reduce the likelihood of iatrogenic multiple gestation resulting from infertility treatment. This document replaces the document of the same name previously published in 2012 (Fertil Steril 2012;97:825-34 by the American Society for Reproductive Medicine).

Female dietary patterns and outcomes of in vitro fertilization (IVF): a systematic literature review

Background

Infertility affects up to 15% of couples. In vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment has modest success rates and some factors associated with infertility and poor treatment outcomes are not modifiable. Several studies have assessed the association between female dietary patterns, a modifiable factor, and IVF outcomes with conflicting results. We performed a systematic literature review to identify female dietary patterns associated with IVF outcomes, evaluate the body of evidence for potential sources of heterogeneity and methodological challenges, and offer suggestions to minimize heterogeneity and bias in future studies.

Methods

We performed systematic literature searches in EMBASE, PubMed, CINAHL, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for studies with a publication date up to March 2020. We excluded studies limited to women who were overweight or diagnosed with PCOS. We included studies that evaluated the outcome of pregnancy or live birth. We conducted an initial bias assessment using the SIGN 50 Methodology Checklist 3.

Results

We reviewed 3280 titles and/or titles and abstracts. Seven prospective cohort studies investigating nine dietary patterns fit the inclusion criteria. Higher adherence to the Mediterranean diet, a ‘profertility’ diet, or a Dutch ‘preconception’ diet was associated with pregnancy or live birth after IVF treatment in at least one study. However, causation cannot be assumed. Studies were potentially hindered by methodological challenges (misclassification of the exposure, left truncation, and lack of comprehensive control for confounding) with an associated risk of bias. Studies of the Mediterranean diet were highly heterogenous in findings, study population, and methods. Remaining dietary patterns have only been examined in single and relatively small studies.

Conclusions

Future studies with rigorous and more uniform methodologies are needed to assess the association between female dietary patterns and IVF outcomes. At the clinical level, findings from this review do not support recommending any single dietary pattern for the purpose of improving pregnancy or live birth rates in women undergoing IVF treatment.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12937-021-00757-7.

Should intrauterine inseminations still be proposed in cases of unexplained infertility? Retrospective study and literature review

OBJECTIVE

Unexplained infertility is defined by the absence of identifiable causes of infertility. The results of randomized studies and meta-analysis regarding the treatment of unexplained infertility are discordant due to methodological problems.

DESIGN

The aim of this study is to compare the clinical pregnancy rate per cycle (CPR/c) in IUI and IVF/ICSI in cases of unexplained infertility, according to the woman's age group and to identify the factors which predict success.

INTERVENTIONS

We performed a retrospective study in two ART centers, comparing overall clinical pregnancy, ongoing pregnancy and live birth rates in IVF/ICSI and IUI. We also compared pregnancy and birth rates according to different female age groups.

RESULTS

855 IVF/ICSI and 804 IUI cycles were compared. We found a significant difference (p < 0.001) in the pregnancy and live birth rates per cycle between IUI and IVF/ICSI, overall and in the different female age groups, except in women aged 40 and over. The greatest chances of pregnancy with IUI are found in women with secondary unexplained infertility, during the first two cycles and with a bi-follicular response to stimulation. In IVF/ICSI, pregnancy rates are higher in women with secondary unexplained infertility, in the first two cycles, in IVF and in women receiving a transfer of two embryos regardless of the embryonic stage.

CONCLUSION

We recommend IVF/ICSI treatment rather than IUI for unexplained infertility (OR CPR/c 4.20 with 95% CI [3.72-4.68]). This is in accordance with NICE, which advises the use of IVF after 2 years.

Agents for ovarian stimulation for intrauterine insemination (IUI) in ovulatory women with infertility

BACKGROUND

Intrauterine insemination (IUI), combined with ovarian stimulation (OS), has been demonstrated to be an effective treatment for infertile couples. Several agents for ovarian stimulation, combined with IUI, have been proposed, but it is still not clear which agents for stimulation are the most effective. This is an update of the review, first published in 2007.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of agents for ovarian stimulation for intrauterine insemination in infertile ovulatory women.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group trials register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and two trial registers from their inception to November 2020. We performed reference checking and contacted study authors and experts in the field to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included truly randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared different agents for ovarian stimulation combined with IUI for infertile ovulatory women concerning couples with unexplained infertility. mild male factor infertility and minimal to mild endometriosis.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

In this updated review, we have included a total of 82 studies, involving 12,614 women. Due to the multitude of comparisons between different agents for ovarian stimulation, we highlight the seven most often reported here. Gonadotropins versus anti-oestrogens (13 studies) For live birth, the results of five studies were pooled and showed a probable improvement in the cumulative live birth rate for gonadotropins compared to anti-oestrogens (odds ratio (OR) 1.37, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.05 to 1.79; I² = 30%; 5 studies, 1924 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). This suggests that if the chance of live birth following anti-oestrogens is assumed to be 22.8%, the chance following gonadotropins would be between 23.7% and 34.6%. The pooled effect of seven studies revealed that we are uncertain whether gonadotropins lead to a higher multiple pregnancy rate compared with anti-oestrogens (OR 1.58, 95% CI 0.60 to 4.17; I² = 58%; 7 studies, 2139 participants; low-certainty evidence). Aromatase inhibitors versus anti-oestrogens (8 studies) One study reported live birth rates for this comparison. We are uncertain whether aromatase inhibitors improve live birth rate compared with anti-oestrogens (OR 0.75, CI 95% 0.51 to 1.11; 1 study, 599 participants; low-certainty evidence). This suggests that if the chance of live birth following anti-oestrogens is 23.4%, the chance following aromatase inhibitors would be between 13.5% and 25.3%. The results of pooling four studies revealed that we are uncertain whether aromatase inhibitors compared with anti-oestrogens lead to a higher multiple pregnancy rate (OR 1.28, CI 95% 0.61 to 2.68; I² = 0%; 4 studies, 1000 participants; low-certainty evidence).  Gonadotropins with GnRH (gonadotropin-releasing hormone) agonist versus gonadotropins alone (4 studies) No data were available for live birth. The pooled effect of two studies  revealed that we are uncertain whether gonadotropins with GnRH agonist lead to a higher multiple pregnancy rate compared to gonadotropins alone (OR 2.53, 95% CI 0.82 to 7.86; I² = 0; 2 studies, 264 participants; very low-certainty evidence).  Gonadotropins with GnRH antagonist versus gonadotropins alone (14 studies) Three studies reported live birth rate per couple, and we are uncertain whether gonadotropins with GnRH antagonist improve live birth rate compared to gonadotropins (OR 1.5, 95% CI 0.52 to 4.39; I² = 81%; 3 studies, 419 participants; very low-certainty evidence). This suggests that if the chance of a live birth following gonadotropins alone is 25.7%, the chance following gonadotropins combined with GnRH antagonist would be between 15.2% and 60.3%. We are also uncertain whether gonadotropins combined with GnRH antagonist lead to a higher multiple pregnancy rate compared with gonadotropins alone (OR 1.30, 95% CI 0.74 to 2.28; I² = 0%; 10 studies, 2095 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). Gonadotropins with anti-oestrogens versus gonadotropins alone (2 studies) Neither of the studies reported data for live birth rate. We are uncertain whether gonadotropins combined with anti-oestrogens lead to a higher multiple pregnancy rate compared with gonadotropins alone, based on one study (OR 3.03, 95% CI 0.12 to 75.1; 1 study, 230 participants; low-certainty evidence). Aromatase inhibitors versus gonadotropins (6 studies) Two studies  revealed that aromatase inhibitors may decrease live birth rate compared with gonadotropins (OR 0.49, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.71; I²=0%; 2 studies, 651 participants; low-certainty evidence). This suggests that if the chance of a live birth following gonadotropins alone is 31.9%,  the chance of live birth following aromatase inhibitors would be between 13.7% and 25%. We are uncertain whether aromatase inhibitors compared with gonadotropins lead to a higher multiple pregnancy rate (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.06 to 8.17; I²=77%; 3 studies, 731 participants; very low-certainty evidence).  Aromatase inhibitors with gonadotropins versus anti-oestrogens with gonadotropins (8 studies) We are uncertain whether aromatase inhibitors combined with gonadotropins improve live birth rate compared with anti-oestrogens plus gonadotropins (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.3 8 to 2.54;  I² = 69%; 3 studies, 708 participants; very low-certainty evidence). This suggests that if the chance of a live birth following anti-oestrogens plus gonadotropins is 13.8%, the chance following aromatase inhibitors plus gonadotropins would be between 5.7% and 28.9%. We are uncertain of the effect of aromatase inhibitors combined with gonadotropins compared to anti-oestrogens combined with gonadotropins on multiple pregnancy rate (OR 1.31, 95% CI 0.39 to 4.37;  I² = 0%; 5 studies, 901 participants; low-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on the available results, gonadotropins probably improve cumulative live birth rate compared with anti-oestrogens (moderate-certainty evidence). Gonadotropins may also improve cumulative live birth rate when compared with aromatase inhibitors (low-certainty evidence). From the available data, there is no convincing evidence that aromatase inhibitors lead to higher live birth rates compared to anti-oestrogens. None of the agents compared lead to significantly higher multiple pregnancy rates. Based on low-certainty evidence, there does not seem to be a role for different combined therapies, nor for adding GnRH agonists or GnRH antagonists in IUI programs.

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.

Long-term reproductive outcomes in patients with unexplained infertility: follow-up of the Fast Track and Standard Treatment Trial participants

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate long-term reproductive outcomes in couples who were enrolled in a large randomized controlled trial that studied optimal treatment for unexplained infertility.

DESIGN

Telephone survey, administered between March 2019 and February 2020.

SETTING

Large urban university-affiliated fertility center.

PATIENT(S)

Couples who enrolled in the Fast Track and Standard Treatment Trial (FASTT).

INTERVENTION(S)

None.

MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURE(S)

Number of live births, methods of conception, adoption, and satisfaction regarding family size.

RESULT(S)

Of the 503 couples enrolled in FASTT, 311 (61.8%) were contacted and 286 (56.9%) consented to participate. The mean age and follicle-stimulating hormone level at the time of enrollment in FASTT were 33.1 ± 3.2 years and 6.8 ± 2.2 mIU/mL, respectively, for those who participated in this study. The mean age at follow-up was 49.5 ± 3.4 years. Of the 286 women, 194 (67.8%) had a live birth during the trial and 225 (78.7%) continued to try to conceive after FASTT. Of those who tried to conceive without treatment, 101 of 157 (64.3%) had a successful live birth, whereas 12 (5.3%) women had a live birth via intrauterine insemination and 82 (36.4%) via autologous oocyte in vitro fertilization. Overall, 182 (80.9%) women achieved a live birth after FASTT.

CONCLUSION(S)

The majority of couples were able to achieve a live birth after FASTT. Only 19 (6.6%) never achieved a live birth during their reproductive years. Moving to treatment sooner allows the opportunity to achieve >1 live birth, which is associated with increased satisfaction regarding family size. This further supports access to care and insurance coverage for infertility treatment.

Diagnosis and Management of Infertility: A Review

IMPORTANCE

In the US, approximately 12.7% of reproductive age women seek treatment for infertility each year. This review summarizes current evidence regarding diagnosis and treatment of infertility.

OBSERVATIONS

Infertility is defined as the failure to achieve pregnancy after 12 months of regular unprotected sexual intercourse. Approximately 85% of infertile couples have an identifiable cause. The most common causes of infertility are ovulatory dysfunction, male factor infertility, and tubal disease. The remaining 15% of infertile couples have "unexplained infertility." Lifestyle and environmental factors, such as smoking and obesity, can adversely affect fertility. Ovulatory disorders account for approximately 25% of infertility diagnoses; 70% of women with anovulation have polycystic ovary syndrome. Infertility can also be a marker of an underlying chronic disease associated with infertility. Clomiphene citrate, aromatase inhibitors such as letrozole, and gonadotropins are used to induce ovulation or for ovarian stimulation during in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles. Adverse effects of gonadotropins include multiple pregnancy (up to 36% of cycles, depending on specific therapy) and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (1%-5% of cycles), consisting of ascites, electrolyte imbalance, and hypercoagulability. For individuals presenting with anovulation, ovulation induction with timed intercourse is often the appropriate initial treatment choice. For couples with unexplained infertility, endometriosis, or mild male factor infertility, an initial 3 to 4 cycles of ovarian stimulation may be pursued; IVF should be considered if these approaches do not result in pregnancy. Because female fecundity declines with age, this factor should guide decision-making. Immediate IVF may be considered as a first-line treatment strategy in women older than 38 to 40 years. IVF is also indicated in cases of severe male factor infertility or untreated bilateral tubal factor.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Approximately 1 in 8 women aged 15 to 49 years receive infertility services. Although success rates vary by age and diagnosis, accurate diagnosis and effective therapy along with shared decision-making can facilitate achievement of fertility goals in many couples treated for infertility.

Intrauterine insemination with ovarian stimulation is a successful step prior to assisted reproductive technology for couples with unexplained infertility

The present retrospective cohort study analysed data of couples with unexplained infertility who underwent two to three intrauterine insemination (IUI) cycles. The inclusion criteria were age 20-40 years, failure to conceive for at least two years of unprotected intercourse, ovulation, normal semen analysis, and tubal patency. Total of 578 IUI cycles of 286 couples with unexplained infertility were included in the final analyses. The mean age and duration of infertility of the study population were 28.8 ± 5.1 and 5.2 ± 3.4 years, respectively. The clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) and live birth rate (LBR) per cycle were 16.6 and 13.1%, respectively. The cumulative CPR following two to three IUI cycles was 33.5% and the cumulative LBR was 26.5% for the entire cohort. The duration of infertility was significantly shorter in women whose IUI attempt were successful (p = .036). Up to three cycles of IUI with ovarian stimulation seems as an effective first-line treatment modality in unexplained infertility.IMPACT STATEMENTWhat is already known on this subject? Cont rolled ovarian stimulation combined with intrauterine insemination (IUI) is a common infertility treatment as a low-cost, less-invasive alternative to in vitro fertilisation (IVF) and was approved as a first line treatment option for unexplained infertility However, the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence (NICE) guideline states that IUI is not recommended to couples with unexplained infertility, male factor and mild endometriosis, unless the couples have religious, cultural or social objections to proceed with IVF.What do the results of this study add? Up to three IUI cycles with ovarian stimulation can be considered as an effective treatment modality in unexplained infertility even in couples who could not achieve pregnancy by expectant management for two years.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? The clinicians should reconsider the NICE recommendation of IVF in the light of recent studies including ours which recommend IUI together when dealing couples with unexplained infertility.

IUI needs fairer appraisal to improve patient and stakeholder choices

Information supporting IVF at the expense of intrauterine insemination (IUI) has become commonplace, but it lacks critical analyses. Data from poorly practiced IUI, without an equivalent comparison to IVF, has been generalised to recommend a total abandonment of IUI in favour of IVF treatment. Our intention with this paper is to reappraise and balance arguments so that patients and stakeholders can have an unbiased informed choice. We provide information that reveals IUI to predominate over IVF in terms of integrated success, risks and cost to deliver one live birth whilst obviating the maternal and neonatal costs. Exceptional cost savings are demonstrated for IUI over IVF for fee-paying agencies and patients with lowered risks of maternal and neonatal care along with other risks including OHSS, fetal reduction and termination of pregnancies. This analysis supports the view that patients and stakeholders can choose IUI instead of IVF in most instances, except with bilateral tubal blockage and severe male factor infertility. It is apparent that fertility clinics need to re-evaluate and reconsider this field, and IUI can be of benefit to both subfertile patients and the stakeholders.

Iodine and fertility: do we know enough?

Iodine is a vital micronutrient and its importance in thyroid function is well established. However, abnormalities in iodine intake may also have other effects. In particular, iodine is taken up avidly by the ovary and endometrium. Iodine deficiency is associated with reduced fertility. The use of high iodine concentration contrast media has recently been shown to improve conception rates in couples with unexplained infertility (UI). We hypothesize that this improvement could be related to the iodine excess and mechanisms independent of its action on thyroid. In this article, the metabolism of iodine and its potential role in fertility will be discussed, including the impact of both iodine deficiency and excess states and the importance of iodine in normal fetal development. This will include insights from animal studies on the effect of iodine in the uterine and ovarian structural environment, hormonal milieu and immunological factors affecting implantation. We speculate that iodine may well have a role as a potential therapy for UI.

Identification of predictive factors for the probability of pregnancy following ovulation stimulation-intra-uterine insemination cycles in terms of female and male

AIM

To identify which positive prognostic parameters contribute to successful treatment outcomes and the probability of pregnancy by analyzing the results of infertile couples underwent ovulation stimulation (OS) and intra-uterine insemination (IUI) in our clinic.

METHODS

Five hundred and nineteen couples who underwent OS-IUI treatment because of a mild-moderate male factor, unexplained infertility, or anovulation were retrospectively analyzed. The data collected included patient demographics, cycle characteristic, sperm parameters and pregnancy rates. The main outcome measure was pregnancy rate (PR).

RESULTS

Our overall PR was 17.72% (n = 92). In women who did not achieve pregnancy, age, BMI and duration of infertility were significantly higher (P < 0.001, P < 0.001 and P = 0.03, respectively). The IUI indications of higher PR were unexplained infertility (P = 0.018) and primary infertility (P = 0.003). AFC was significantly lower and the total dosage of gonadotropins was significantly higher in women who did not achieve pregnancy (P = 0.001 and P = 0.017, respectively). The number of progressive motile spermatozoa inseminated and the morphology were significantly higher in women who did not achieve pregnancy (P = 0.056 and P = 0.001, respectively). Female age ≤ 30 (OR = 0.87; 95% CI: 0.81-0.95; P < 0.01), BMI ≤23.3 kg/m² (OR = 0.87; 95% CI: 0.80-0.95; P = 0.002) and AFC > 9 (OR = 1.07; 95% CI: 1-1.15; P = 0.034) increase the pregnancy.

CONCLUSION

Younger women, especially those with unexplained infertility, primary infertility, shorter duration of infertility, normal ovarian reserve, higher motile spermatozoa inseminated and sperm morphology, could benefit from OS-IUI.

Predictive factors for intrauterine insemination outcomes: a review

PURPOSE

Intrauterine insemination (IUI) is a frequently utilized method of assisted reproduction for patients with mild male factor infertility, anovulation, endometriosis, and unexplained infertility. The purpose of this review is to discuss factors that affect IUI outcomes, including infertility diagnosis, semen parameters, and stimulation regimens.

METHODS

We reviewed the published literature to evaluate how patient and cycle specific factors affect IUI outcomes, specifically clinical pregnancy rate, live birth rate, spontaneous abortion rate and multiple pregnancy rate.

RESULTS

Most data support IUI for men with a total motile count > 5 million and post-wash sperm count > 1 million. High sperm DNA fragmentation does not consistently affect pregnancy rates in IUI cycles. Advancing maternal and paternal age negatively impact pregnancy rates. Paternal obesity contributes to infertility while elevated maternal BMI increases medication requirements without impacting pregnancy outcomes. For ovulation induction, letrozole and clomiphene citrate result in similar pregnancy outcomes and are recommended over gonadotropins given increased risk for multiple pregnancies with gonadotropins. Letrozole is preferred for obese women with polycystic ovary syndrome. IUI is most effective for women with ovulatory dysfunction and unexplained infertility, and least effective for women with tubal factor and stage III-IV endometriosis. Outcomes are similar when IUI is performed with ovulation trigger or spontaneous ovulatory surge, and ovulation may be monitored by urine or serum. Most pregnancies occur within the first four IUI cycles, after which in vitro fertilization should be considered.

CONCLUSIONS

Providers recommending IUI for treatment of infertility should take into account all of these factors when evaluating patients and making treatment recommendations.

Real-world experience with intravaginal culture using INVOCELL: an alternative model for infertility treatment

Objective

To describe the current practice indications, methodology, and outcomes from a real-world experience of intravaginal culture (IVC) using INVOCELL.

Design

A descriptive study outlining real-world experience with INVOCELL that addresses patient selection, ovarian stimulation, embryology laboratory practices, and outcomes.

Setting

Five fertility centers in Missouri, Texas, North Carolina, South Carolina, and Virginia.

Patients

Four hundred sixty-three patients undergoing 526 cycles.

Intervention

IVC using INVOCELL.

Main Outcome Measures

Cumulative pregnancy rate and live births. Secondary outcomes of interest included percent good quality embryos.

Results

IVC with INVOCELL was primarily used in women <38 years with anti-Mullerian hormone level >0.8 ng/mL. The mean numbers of retrieved oocytes ranged from 9.2 to 16. Mean numbers of oocytes and sperm-injected oocytes loaded per INVOCELL ranged from a mean of 6.4–9.5 with a reported maximum of 34 oocytes loaded into the device. Most (95%) of the embryos were transferred on day 5. The mean blastocyst recovery per oocyte loaded into the device ranged from 19% to 34%; mean cumulative live birth plus ongoing pregnancy rates ranged from 29% to 53% per cycle start and 40% to 61% per transfer.

Conclusions

This study of IVC using INVOCELL as an alternative model for infertility treatment confirms its utility as a viable alternative to standard incubator-based in vitro fertilization. The technology is compatible within the current framework of practice patterns and, when appropriately used, results in acceptable blastocyst recovery and live birth rates. Further use of INVOCELL in other clinical situations is warranted.

Sterility, an Overlooked Health Condition

Clinically, infertility is defined as the inability to conceive after a certain period. In contrast, sterility is defined as the inability to produce a biological child; however, this is not a practical definition that can be applied in a clinical setting to a patient’s diagnosis. Unlike infertility, sterility is rarely discussed in biomedical and clinical literature and is often used synonymously with infertility. Infertility affects about 10% of couples globally, but the prevalence of sterility remains unknown. We divide sterility into three subtypes natural, clinical, and hardship. To estimate sterility prevalence, we analyzed primary literature and meta-analysis papers on the rates of live births and pregnancies throughout several treatments of infertile couples (e.g., untreated patients, in vitro fertilization-treated, and patients administered other treatments). This analysis indicates that all treatments fail in delivering a biological child to most couples, suggesting that most infertile couples may fail to conceive. More comprehensive primary studies are needed to provide a precise estimate of sterility. Furthermore, research is needed to study the causes of sterility, as well as develop methods for diagnosis and treatment that are financially affordable and emotionally tolerable. Altogether, sterility is an under-discussed condition that is more common than expected, as many infertile couples are unable to conceive and are, in effect, sterile.

Is Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection the Solution for all in Unexplained Infertility?

Intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) was first introduced as a supplemental method to conventional in vitro fertilization (c-IVF) for couples with severe male factor infertility to overcome the poor fertilization rate, while its indications expanded in current clinical practice and gained worldwide popularity. However, ICSI is invasive and crosses all natural barriers, raising several unresolved concerns regarding procedure-dependent and procedure-independent risks, as well as the characteristic of being labor-intensive and more expensive than c-IVF. This review is aimed to draw readers' attention, to the widespread use of ICSI worldwide, with its effectiveness in different indications of infertility, especially in those with unexplained infertility, as well as the cost-effectiveness of the ICSI-for-all strategy. Also, we covered current evidence on the short- and long-term safety of children born thanks to ICSI-aided conception. Further well-designed, adequately powered, and randomized controlled clinical trials are absolutely needed to arrive at a consensus on the use of ICSI over c-IVF in different populations.

Treatment Strategies for Unexplained Infertility

Unexplained infertility is a common diagnosis among couples with infertility. Pragmatic treatment options in these couples are directed at trying to improve chances to conceive, and consequently intrauterine insemination (IUI) with ovarian stimulation and in vitro fertilization (IVF) are standard clinical practice, while expectant management remains an important alternative. While evidence on IVF or IUI with ovarian stimulation versus expectant management was inconclusive, these interventions seem more effective in couples with a poor prognosis of natural conception. Strategies such as strict cancellation criteria and single-embryo transfer aim to reduce multiple pregnancies without compromising cumulative live birth. We propose a prognosis-based approach to manage couples with unexplained infertility so as to expose less couples to unnecessary interventions and less mothers and children to the potential adverse effects of ovarian stimulation or laboratory procedures.

Evidence-based treatments for couples with unexplained infertility: a guideline

OBJECTIVE

To provide evidence-based recommendations to practicing physicians and others regarding the effectiveness and safety of therapies for unexplained infertility.

METHODS

ASRM conducted a literature search, which included systematic reviews, meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, and prospective and retrospective comparative observational studies published from 1968 through 2019. The ASRM Practice Committee and a task force of experts used available evidence and informal consensus to develop evidence-based guideline recommendations.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Outcomes of interest included: live-birth rate, clinical pregnancy rate, implantation rate, fertilization rate, multiple pregnancy rate, dose of treatment, rate of ovarian hyperstimulation, abortion rate, and ectopic pregnancy rate.

RESULT(S)

The literature search identified 88 relevant studies to inform the evidence base for this guideline.

RECOMMENDATION(S)

Evidence-based recommendations were developed for the following treatments for couples with unexplained infertility: natural cycle with intrauterine insemination (IUI); clomiphene citrate with intercourse; aromatase inhibitors with intercourse; gonadotropins with intercourse; clomiphene citrate with IUI; aromatase inhibitors with IUI; combination of clomiphene citrate or letrozole and gonadotropins (low dose and conventional dose) with IUI; low-dose gonadotropins with IUI; conventional-dose gonadotropins with IUI; timing of IUI; and in vitro fertilization and treatment paradigms.

CONCLUSION(S)

The treatment of unexplained infertility is by necessity empiric. For most couples, the best initial therapy is a course (typically 3 or 4 cycles) of ovarian stimulation with oral medications and intrauterine insemination (OS-IUI) followed by in vitro fertilization for those unsuccessful with OS-IUI treatments.

Twenty-one year experience with intrauterine inseminations after controlled ovarian stimulation with gonadotropins: maternal age is the only prognostic factor for success

PURPOSE

To report our experience on homologous intrauterine insemination (IUI) with gonadotropin controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) cycles and to examine different variables which could predict IUI success.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective analysis of IUIs performed between January 1997 and December 2017. A total of 7359 COS IUI's procedures (2901 couples) were reviewed. Clinical pregnancy, live birth rate and age, body mass index (BMI), smoking habit, duration of infertility, sperm characteristics before and after treatment (total motile count, morphology, and vitality), day 3 FSH, total gonadotropin dose, and number of follicles were assessed by multivariate logistic regression analysis, and data were expressed as odds ratio (OR).

RESULTS

The mean female age at the time of COS was 35.10 ± 3.93 years. The most common single infertility diagnoses were unexplained infertility (53.55%), mild male factor (19.69%), and anovulation (10.95%). The total progressive motile sperm count (TPMC) was > 1 × 10⁶/ml (mean 1.34 ± 1.08 × 10⁶/ml). The clinical pregnancy rate was 9.38%, and the live birth rate was 7.19% per cycle. Twin pregnancies were 12.17%. Cumulative pregnancy was 21.89% and cumulative live birth rate was 17.58% per couple. Clinical pregnancy and live birth rates were significantly associated with female age [OR 0.97 (95% CI 0.95-0.99) and 0.95 (95% CI 0.93-0.97), respectively] and day 3 FSH [OR 0.91 (95% CI 0.87-0.94) e 0.90 (95% CI 0.87-0.94), respectively].

CONCLUSIONS

Clinical pregnancy rate and live birth rates after COS-IUIs were significantly influenced by female age and FSH levels.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinical trial registration number: NCT03836118.

Gonadotropins versus oral ovarian stimulation agents for unexplained infertility: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To compare live birth and multiple gestation in patients diagnosed with unexplained infertility undergoing intrauterine insemination after ovarian stimulation (OS-IUI) with oral medications versus gonadotropins.

DESIGN

Systemic review and meta-analysis.

SETTING

Not applicable.

PATIENT(S)

Patients undergoing OS-IUI for treatment of unexplained infertility.

INTERVENTION(S)

Clomiphene, letrozole, or gonadotropins for OS-IUI.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Live birth and multiple gestation.

RESULT(S)

Eight total trials were identified that met the inclusion criteria and comprised 2,989 patients undergoing 6,590 cycles. One study reported a significant increase in both live births and multiple gestations with the use of gonadotropins, two studies found an increased likelihood of live birth with the use of gonadotropins, and two studies found an increased risk of twins with gonadotropins. The relative risk of live birth in subjects receiving gonadotropins was 1.09. The relative risk of multiple gestation in subjects receiving gonadotropins was 1.06. Clinical pregnancy was higher in protocols with lax cancellation policies or higher gonadotropin doses, with subsequent increased relative risks of multiple gestations of 1.20 and 1.15, respectively. Singleton births per subject were similar between the two groups. The results did not change in per-protocol, per cycle, or fixed-effect model sensitivity analyses.

CONCLUSION(S)

For every birth gained with the use of gonadotropins, a similar increased risk of multiple gestation occurs. The randomized data do not support the use of gonadotropin for OS-IUI in women with unexplained infertility.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Prospero CRD4201911998.

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.

Prewash total motile count is a poor predictor of live birth in intrauterine insemination cycles

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether there is a relationship between prewash total motile count and live births in couples undergoing IUI.

DESIGN

Retrospective review in a single academic center.

SETTING

Not applicable.

PATIENT(S)

Couples with infertility undergoing ovulation induction with IUI between 2010 and 2014.

INTERVENTION(S)

Not applicable.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Live births.

RESULT(S)

Our cohort included 310 women who underwent 655 IUI cycles with a cumulative live birth rate (LBR) per couple of 20% and an LBR per cycle of 10%. A analysis yielded no correlation between prewash total motile count (TMC) and live births. No live births occurred with TMC <2 million sperms. Age had a significant negative relationship to LBR. A receiver operating characteristic analysis comparing age and live births indicated a significant decline in live births for women >37 years (90% sensitivity, 70% specificity). The LBR per couple was decreased to 7% in women >37 years compared with 25% in women <37 years.

CONCLUSION(S)

Prewash TMC is a poor predictor of live birth. There were no live births with prewash TMC <2 million sperms. The LBR for women >37 years with IUI was significantly lower than women <37 years.

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.

Transitioning from Infertility-Based (ART 1.0) to Elective (ART 2.0) Use of Assisted Reproductive Technologies and the DOHaD Hypothesis: Do We Need to Change Consenting?

The use of assisted reproductive technologies (ARTs) has increased significantly in recent years. While this is partially due to improved access for infertile patients, another contribution to the growth of ART utilization is represented by individuals without infertility, who electively chose to freeze their gametes and embryos for future use, before ever attempting conception spontaneously. Overall, the safety of ART for parents and children is well described and the risks are modest. However, while long-term health consequences for offspring as postulated by the Developmental Origin of Health and Disease (DOHaD) hypothesis are unknown, numerous animal studies suggest a predisposition for chronic diseases like hypertension and glucose intolerance. In this article, we argue that a key difference exists between infertile patients, who need to use ART as the only means to achieve pregnancy, and (likely) fertile patients who elect to use ART techniques as a family planning option. We believe that these two sets of patients are different and their risks-benefit ratios are different. We propose that while all patients should be aware of the risks, patients planning to utilize ART techniques without a diagnosis of infertility should be encouraged to think critically about the additional risks, particularly the "potential" long-term risks that may be imposed from these elective procedures.

Female subfertility

Subfertility is common and affects one in six couples, half of whom lack an explanation for their delay in conceiving. Developments in the diagnosis and treatment of subfertility over the past 50 years have been truly remarkable. Indeed, current generations of couples with subfertility are more fortunate than previous generations, as they have many more opportunities to become parents. The timely access to effective treatment for subfertility is important as many couples have a narrow window of opportunity before the age-related effects of subfertility limit the likelihood of success. Assisted reproduction can overcome the barriers to fertility caused by tubal disease and low sperm count, but little progress has been made in reducing the effect of increasing age on ovarian function. The next 5-10 years will likely see further increases in birth rates in women with subfertility, a greater awareness of lifestyle factors and a possible refinement of current assisted reproduction techniques and the development of new ones. Such progress will bring challenging questions regarding the potential benefits and harms of treatments involving germ cell manipulation, artificial gametes, genetic screening of embryos and gene editing of embryos. We hope to see a major increase in fertility awareness, access to safe and cost-effective fertility care in low-income countries and a reduction in the current disparity of access to fertility care.

IUI: review and systematic assessment of the evidence that supports global recommendations

BACKGROUND

IUI with or without ovarian stimulation (OS) has become a first-line treatment option for many infertile couples, worldwide. The appropriate treatment modality for couples and their clinical management through IUI or IUI/OS cycles must consider maternal and perinatal outcomes, most notably the clinical complication of higher-order multiple pregnancies associated with IUI-OS. With a current global emphasis to continue to decrease maternal and perinatal mortality and morbidity, the World Health Organization (WHO) had established a multi-year project to review the evidence for the establishment of normative guidance for the implementation of IUI as a treatment to address fertility problems, and to consider its cost-effectiveness for lower resource settings.

OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE

The objective of this review is to provide a review of the evidence of 13 prioritized questions that cover IUI with and without OS. We provide summary recommendations for the development of global, evidence-based guidelines based upon methodology established by the WHO.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a comprehensive search using question-specific relevant search terms in May 2015. For each PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparison and Outcomes) drafted by WHO, specific search terms were used to find the available evidence in MEDLINE (1950 to May 2015) and The Cochrane Library (until May 2015). After presentation to an expert panel, a further hand search of references in relevant reviews was performed up to January 2017. Articles that were found to be relevant were read and analysed by two investigators and critically appraised using the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias, and AMSTAR in case of systematic reviews. The quality of the evidence was assessed using the GRADE system. An independent expert review process of our analysis was conducted in November 2016.

OUTCOMES

This review provides an assessment and synthesis of the evidence that covers 13 clinical questions including the indications for the use of IUI versus expectant management, the sperm parameters required, the best and optimal method of timing and number of inseminations per cycle, prevention strategies to decrease multiple gestational pregnancies, and the cost-effectiveness of IUI versus IVF. We provide an evidence-based formulation of 20 recommendations, as well as two best practice points that address the integration of methods for the prevention of infection in the IUI laboratory. The quality of the evidence ranges from very low to high, with evidence that may be decades old but of high quality, however, we further discuss where critical research gaps in the evidence remain.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS

This review presents an evidence synthesis assessment and includes recommendations that will assist health care providers worldwide with their decision-making when considering IUI treatments, with or without OS, for their patients presenting with fertility problems.

How time to healthy singleton delivery could affect decision-making during infertility treatment: a Delphi consensus

RESEARCH QUESTION

How might time to healthy singleton delivery affect decision-making during infertility treatment?

DESIGN

This was a Delphi consensus investigating expert opinion that comprised three steps. In Step 1, 12 experts developed statements. In Step 2, 27 experts (including 12 from Step 1) voted (online survey) on their agreement/disagreement with each statement (providing reasons). Consensus was reached if ≥66% of participants agreed/disagreed. Statements not reaching consensus were revised and the process repeated until consensus was achieved. In Step 3 details of the final agreed statements were communicated.

RESULTS

Twelve statements were developed, and consensus (agreement) was reached on all after one round of voting.

CONCLUSIONS

Time to healthy singleton delivery should be taken into consideration when making decisions related to infertility treatment, and it is important that fertility treatment is provided in a timely manner, avoiding over- or under-treatment. In all subfertile women <40 years old, IVF outcomes could be optimized by performing up to six single-embryo transfers and certain procedures might reduce time to healthy singleton delivery. These procedures include preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies, frozen replacement cycles immediately after failed fresh cycles and use of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonists. Finally, the number of oocytes retrieved should be maximized to increase cumulative live birth rate.

Endometriosis

Endometriosis is a common inflammatory disease characterized by the presence of tissue outside the uterus that resembles endometrium, mainly on pelvic organs and tissues. It affects ~5-10% of women in their reproductive years - translating to 176 million women worldwide - and is associated with pelvic pain and infertility. Diagnosis is reliably established only through surgical visualization with histological verification, although ovarian endometrioma and deep nodular forms of disease can be detected through ultrasonography and MRI. Retrograde menstruation is regarded as an important origin of the endometrial deposits, but other factors are involved, including a favourable endocrine and metabolic environment, epithelial-mesenchymal transition and altered immunity and inflammatory responses in genetically susceptible women. Current treatments are dictated by the primary indication (infertility or pelvic pain) and are limited to surgery and hormonal treatments and analgesics with many adverse effects that rarely provide long-term relief. Endometriosis substantially affects the quality of life of women and their families and imposes costs on society similar to those of other chronic conditions such as type 2 diabetes mellitus, Crohn's disease and rheumatoid arthritis. Future research must focus on understanding the pathogenesis, identifying disease subtypes, developing non-invasive diagnostic methods and targeting non-hormonal treatments that are acceptable to women who wish to conceive.

Immobilization or mobilization after IUI: an RCT

STUDY QUESTION

Does 15 min of immobilization after IUI improve pregnancy rates?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Immobilization for 15 min after IUI does not improve pregnancy rates.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Prior RCTs report a beneficial effect of supine immobilization for 15 min following IUI compared to immediate mobilization, however, these studies can be criticized. Given the importance for the logistics in daily practice and the lack of biological plausibility we planned a replication study prior to potential implementation of this procedure.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

A single centre RCT, based in an academic setting in the Netherlands, was performed. Participants were randomly assigned for 15 min of supine immobilization following IUI for a maximum of six cycles compared to the standard procedure of immediate mobilization following IUI. Participants and caregivers were not blinded to group assignment. An independent researcher used computer-generated tables to allocate treatments. Stratification occurred to the indication of IUI (unexplained or mild male subfertility). Revelation of allocation took place just before the insemination by the caregiver. The primary outcome was ongoing pregnancy rate per couple.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

A total of 498 couples diagnosed with unexplained or mild male subfertility and an indication for treatment with IUI were approached and randomized in the study, of which 244 participants were assigned to 15 min of supine immobilization and 254 participants to immediate mobilization.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

Participant characteristics were comparable between the groups, and 236 participants were analysed in the immobilization group, versus 245 in the mobilization group. The ongoing pregnancy rate per couple was not found to be superior in the immobilization group (one-sided P-value = 0.97) with 76/236 ongoing pregnancies (32.2%) being accomplished in the immobilization and 98/245 ongoing pregnancies (40.0%) in the immediate mobilization group (relative risk 0.81; 95% CI [0.63, 1.02], risk difference: -7.8%, 95% CI [-16.4%, 0.8%]). No difference was found in miscarriage rate, multiple gestation rate, live birth rate and time to pregnancy between the groups.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

Owing to discontinuation of the planned treatment not all participants reached six IUI cycles or an ongoing pregnancy. However, this is as expected in IUI treatment and mirrors clinical practice. These participants were equally distributed across the two groups. Women with tubal pathology and endocrine disorders were excluded for this trial, and this might narrow generalizability.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

This study shows no positive effect of 15 min of immobilization following IUI on pregnancy rates. Based on available evidence today, including our study, a possible beneficial effect of supine immobilization after IUI is at least doubtful and straightforward implementation does not seem to be justified.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

No funding was received. All authors have nothing to disclose.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Dutch Trial Register NTR 2418.

TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE

20 July 2010.

DATE OF FIRST PATIENT's ENROLMENT

11 August 2010.

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.

Comparison of Effectiveness of Different Protocols Used for Controlled Ovarian Hyperstimulation in Intrauterine Insemination Cycle

Introduction

Intrauterine insemination (IUI) is one of the most commonly performed procedure of assisted reproductive technology, for the treatment of infertility. Controlled ovarian hyperstimulation is an important first step while performing IUI. This study aims at establishing a relationship between stimulation protocol and pregnancy outcome following IUI.

Methods

This is a retrospective study of 1001 cycles of IUI in which the patients were divided into two groups: Group A Clomiphene citrate (CC only) and Group B Clomiphene citrate and Gonadotropin or Gonadotropin alone(CC+GN OR GN alone). The primary outcome assessed was clinical pregnancy rates (CPRs), and the secondary outcomes were miscarriage rate (MR), multiple pregnancy rates (MPRs), follicle numbers and endometrial thickness (ET).

Results

Significantly, higher CPR was observed in Group B in comparison with Group A (14.55 vs. 7.82%; p = 0.05). MR was much higher in Group A in comparison with Group B, (14.29 vs. 5.43%; p = 0.94), but it was non-significant. The follicle number and the ET of the Group A versus Group B are (1.54 ± 0.69 vs. 1.90 ± 1.04; p = 0.0003) and (8.56 ± 1.33 vs. 8.39 ± 1.29; p = 0.1784), respectively; and for subgroups, Group B1 and Group B2 are 1.92 ± 0.99 versus 1.65 ± 0.92; p = 0.0008 and 8.32 ± 1.27 vs. 8.69 ± 1.24; p = 0.0004, respectively.

Conclusion

GN, either alone or the combination with CC, gives a higher CPR and a lower abortion rate following IUI, thus increasing the multiple pregnancy rate.

Intrauterine insemination with ovarian stimulation versus expectant management for unexplained infertility (TUI): a pragmatic, open-label, randomised, controlled, two-centre trial

BACKGROUND

Women with unexplained infertility are often offered intrauterine insemination (IUI) with ovarian stimulation as an alternative to in-vitro fertilisation (IVF). However, little evidence exists that IUI is an effective treatment. In 2013, the UK National Institute for Health and Care Excellence recommended that IUI should not be routinely offered for couples with unexplained infertility.

METHODS

For this pragmatic, open-label, randomised, controlled, two-centre study, we enrolled women attending two fertility clinics in New Zealand with unexplained infertility and an unfavourable prognosis of natural conception. Participants were randomly assigned (1:1) using a computer-generated randomisation sequence, prepared by an independent statistician, to either three cycles of IUI with ovarian stimulation (with either oral clomifene citrate [50-150 mg, days 2-6] or oral letrozole [2·5-7·5 mg, days 2-6], with choice of ovarian stimulation made by the clinic) or three cycles of expectant management (couples advised to be sexually active around the likely time of ovulation and provided with a diary to record the first day of each menstrual cycle and dates of sexual activity) in blocks of four, six, and ten, without stratification. The participating couple and the clinicians were informed of treatment allocation. The primary outcome was cumulative livebirth rate in the intention-to-treat population. The safety analyses were done in the intention-to-treat population. This study was prospectively registered with the Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Register, number ACTRN12612001025820.

FINDINGS

Between March 12, 2013, and May 12, 2016, we randomly assigned 101 women to IUI with ovarian stimulation and 100 to expectant management, all of whom were included in the primary efficacy analysis and safety analyses. Women assigned to IUI had a higher cumulative livebirth rate than women assigned to expectant management (31 [31%] livebirths among 101 women vs nine [9%] livebirths among 100 women; risk ratio [RR] 3·41, 95% CI 1·71-6·79; p=0·0003). Of 31 livebirths in the IUI group, 23 resulted from IUI cycles and eight were conceived without assistance before or between IUI cycles. Of nine livebirths in the expectant management group, one patient was pregnant from IUI with ovarian stimulation at study entry and one had received off-protocol treatment (IVF). Two sets of twins were born, both in the IUI group (one from a cancelled cycle for over-response).

INTERPRETATION

IUI with ovarian stimulation is a safe and effective treatment for women with unexplained infertility and an unfavourable prognosis for natural conception.

FUNDING

Auckland Medical Research Foundation, Evelyn Bond Fund of Auckland District Health Board, Mercia Barnes Trust of Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, Maurice and Phyllis Paykel Trust, and The Nurture Foundation for Reproductive Research.

Higher TSH Levels Within the Normal Range Are Associated With Unexplained Infertility

CONTEXT

Unexplained infertility (UI), defined as the inability to conceive after 12 months of unprotected intercourse with no diagnosed cause, affects 10% to 30% of infertile couples. An improved understanding of the mechanisms underlying UI could lead to less invasive and less costly treatment strategies. Abnormalities in thyroid function and hyperprolactinemia are well-known causes of infertility, but whether thyrotropin (TSH) and prolactin levels within the normal range are associated with UI is unknown.

OBJECTIVE

To compare TSH and prolactin levels in women with UI and women with a normal fertility evaluation except for an azoospermic or severely oligospermic male partner.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Cross-sectional study including women evaluated at a large academic health system between 1 January 2000 and 31 December 2012 with normal TSH (levels within the normal range of the assay and ≤5 mIU/L) and normal prolactin levels (≤20 ng/mL) and either UI (n = 187) or no other cause of infertility other than an azoospermic or severely oligospermic partner (n = 52).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

TSH and prolactin.

RESULTS

Women with UI had significantly higher TSH levels than controls [UI: TSH 1.95 mIU/L, interquartile range: (1.54, 2.61); severe male factor: TSH 1.66 mIU/L, interquartile range: (1.25, 2.17); P = 0.003]. This finding remained significant after we controlled for age, body mass index, and smoking status. Nearly twice as many women with UI (26.9%) had a TSH ≥2.5 mIU/L compared with controls (13.5%; P < 0.05). Prolactin levels did not differ between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Women with UI have higher TSH levels compared with a control population. More studies are necessary to determine whether treatment of high-normal TSH levels decreases time to conception in couples with UI.