Cargando…
In vitro fertilization-embryo transfer in patients with unexplained recurrent pregnancy loss
BACKGROUND: Empiric therapy for patients with unexplained recurrent pregnancy loss (URPL) is not precise. Some patients will ask for assisted reproductive technology due to secondary infertility or advanced maternal age. The clinical outcomes of URPL patients who have undergone in vitro fertilizatio...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Lippincott Williams & Wilkins
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8654439/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34669635 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/CM9.0000000000001657 |
_version_ | 1784611862018523136 |
---|---|
author | Li, Tai-Yang Li, Rong Zeng, Lin Li, Li Qiao, Jie Liu, Ping Wang, Hai-Yan |
author_facet | Li, Tai-Yang Li, Rong Zeng, Lin Li, Li Qiao, Jie Liu, Ping Wang, Hai-Yan |
author_sort | Li, Tai-Yang |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Empiric therapy for patients with unexplained recurrent pregnancy loss (URPL) is not precise. Some patients will ask for assisted reproductive technology due to secondary infertility or advanced maternal age. The clinical outcomes of URPL patients who have undergone in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer (IVF-ET) require elucidation. The IVF outcome and influencing factors of URPL patients need further study. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was designed, and 312 infertile patients with URPL who had been treated during January 2012 to December 2015 in the Reproduction Center of Peking University Third Hospital were included. By comparing clinical outcomes between these patients and those with tubal factor infertility (TFI), the factors affecting the clinical outcomes of URPL patients were analyzed. RESULTS: The clinical pregnancy rate (35.18% vs. 34.52% in fresh ET cycles, P = 0.877; 34.48% vs. 40.27% in frozen-thawed ET cycles, P = 0.283) and live birth rate (LBR) in fresh ET cycles (27.67% vs. 26.59%, P = 0.785) were not significantly different between URPL group and TFI group. URPL group had lower LBR in frozen-thawed ET cycles than that of TFI group (23.56% vs. 33.56%, P = 0.047), but the cumulative LBRs (34.69% vs. 38.26%, P = 0.368) were not significantly different between the two groups. The increased endometrial thickness (EMT) on the human chorionic gonadotropin day (odds ratio [OR]: 0.848, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.748–0.962, P = 0.010) and the increased number of eggs retrieved (OR: 0.928, 95% CI: 0.887–0.970, P = 0.001) were protective factors for clinical pregnancy in stimulated cycles. The increased number of eggs retrieved (OR: 0.875, 95% CI: 0.846–0.906, P < 0.001), the increased two-pronucleus rate (OR: 0.151, 95% CI: 0.052–0.437, P < 0.001), and increased EMT (OR: 0.876, 95% CI: 0.770–0.997, P = 0.045) in ET day were protective factors for the cumulative live birth outcome. CONCLUSION: After matching ages, no significant differences in clinical outcomes were found between the patients with URPL and the patients with TFI. A thicker endometrium and more retrieved oocytes increase the probability of pregnancy in fresh transfer cycles, but a better normal fertilization potential will increase the possibility of a live birth. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8654439 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Lippincott Williams & Wilkins |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-86544392021-12-10 In vitro fertilization-embryo transfer in patients with unexplained recurrent pregnancy loss Li, Tai-Yang Li, Rong Zeng, Lin Li, Li Qiao, Jie Liu, Ping Wang, Hai-Yan Chin Med J (Engl) Original Articles BACKGROUND: Empiric therapy for patients with unexplained recurrent pregnancy loss (URPL) is not precise. Some patients will ask for assisted reproductive technology due to secondary infertility or advanced maternal age. The clinical outcomes of URPL patients who have undergone in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer (IVF-ET) require elucidation. The IVF outcome and influencing factors of URPL patients need further study. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was designed, and 312 infertile patients with URPL who had been treated during January 2012 to December 2015 in the Reproduction Center of Peking University Third Hospital were included. By comparing clinical outcomes between these patients and those with tubal factor infertility (TFI), the factors affecting the clinical outcomes of URPL patients were analyzed. RESULTS: The clinical pregnancy rate (35.18% vs. 34.52% in fresh ET cycles, P = 0.877; 34.48% vs. 40.27% in frozen-thawed ET cycles, P = 0.283) and live birth rate (LBR) in fresh ET cycles (27.67% vs. 26.59%, P = 0.785) were not significantly different between URPL group and TFI group. URPL group had lower LBR in frozen-thawed ET cycles than that of TFI group (23.56% vs. 33.56%, P = 0.047), but the cumulative LBRs (34.69% vs. 38.26%, P = 0.368) were not significantly different between the two groups. The increased endometrial thickness (EMT) on the human chorionic gonadotropin day (odds ratio [OR]: 0.848, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.748–0.962, P = 0.010) and the increased number of eggs retrieved (OR: 0.928, 95% CI: 0.887–0.970, P = 0.001) were protective factors for clinical pregnancy in stimulated cycles. The increased number of eggs retrieved (OR: 0.875, 95% CI: 0.846–0.906, P < 0.001), the increased two-pronucleus rate (OR: 0.151, 95% CI: 0.052–0.437, P < 0.001), and increased EMT (OR: 0.876, 95% CI: 0.770–0.997, P = 0.045) in ET day were protective factors for the cumulative live birth outcome. CONCLUSION: After matching ages, no significant differences in clinical outcomes were found between the patients with URPL and the patients with TFI. A thicker endometrium and more retrieved oocytes increase the probability of pregnancy in fresh transfer cycles, but a better normal fertilization potential will increase the possibility of a live birth. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins 2021-10-20 2021-09-20 /pmc/articles/PMC8654439/ /pubmed/34669635 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/CM9.0000000000001657 Text en Copyright © 2021 The Chinese Medical Association, produced by Wolters Kluwer, Inc. under the CC-BY-NC-ND license. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Non Commercial-No Derivatives License 4.0 (CCBY-NC-ND), where it is permissible to download and share the work provided it is properly cited. The work cannot be changed in any way or used commercially without permission from the journal. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Li, Tai-Yang Li, Rong Zeng, Lin Li, Li Qiao, Jie Liu, Ping Wang, Hai-Yan In vitro fertilization-embryo transfer in patients with unexplained recurrent pregnancy loss |
title | In vitro fertilization-embryo transfer in patients with unexplained recurrent pregnancy loss |
title_full | In vitro fertilization-embryo transfer in patients with unexplained recurrent pregnancy loss |
title_fullStr | In vitro fertilization-embryo transfer in patients with unexplained recurrent pregnancy loss |
title_full_unstemmed | In vitro fertilization-embryo transfer in patients with unexplained recurrent pregnancy loss |
title_short | In vitro fertilization-embryo transfer in patients with unexplained recurrent pregnancy loss |
title_sort | in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer in patients with unexplained recurrent pregnancy loss |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8654439/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34669635 http://dx.doi.org/10.1097/CM9.0000000000001657 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT litaiyang invitrofertilizationembryotransferinpatientswithunexplainedrecurrentpregnancyloss AT lirong invitrofertilizationembryotransferinpatientswithunexplainedrecurrentpregnancyloss AT zenglin invitrofertilizationembryotransferinpatientswithunexplainedrecurrentpregnancyloss AT lili invitrofertilizationembryotransferinpatientswithunexplainedrecurrentpregnancyloss AT qiaojie invitrofertilizationembryotransferinpatientswithunexplainedrecurrentpregnancyloss AT liuping invitrofertilizationembryotransferinpatientswithunexplainedrecurrentpregnancyloss AT wanghaiyan invitrofertilizationembryotransferinpatientswithunexplainedrecurrentpregnancyloss |