Cargando…

The Clinical Efficacy of Personalized Embryo Transfer Guided by the Endometrial Receptivity Array/Analysis on IVF/ICSI Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Objective: To assess the prevalence of displaced window of implantation (WOI) in infertile women, and the clinical utility of personalized embryo transfer (pET) guided by the endometrial receptivity array/analysis (ERA) on IVF/ICSI outcomes. Methods: The protocol was registered at Prospero: CRD42020...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Liu, Zhenteng, Liu, Xuemei, Wang, Meimei, Zhao, Huishan, He, Shunzhi, Lai, Shoucui, Qu, Qinglan, Wang, Xinrong, Zhao, Dongmei, Bao, Hongchu
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Frontiers Media S.A. 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9092494/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35574479
http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fphys.2022.841437
Descripción
Sumario:Objective: To assess the prevalence of displaced window of implantation (WOI) in infertile women, and the clinical utility of personalized embryo transfer (pET) guided by the endometrial receptivity array/analysis (ERA) on IVF/ICSI outcomes. Methods: The protocol was registered at Prospero: CRD42020204237. We systematically searched all published English literature related to the prevalence of WOI displacement and ongoing pregnancy rate/live birth rate in the overall good-prognosis infertile patients (GPP) and/or repeated implantation failure (RIF) patients undergoing IVF/ICSI-ET cycles after ERA test until August 2021. Result(s): 11 published studies were enrolled in the final analysis. The estimate of the incidence of WOI displacement based on ERA was 38% (95%CI 19–57%) in GPP and 34% (95%CI 24–43%) in RIF, respectively. There was no difference in OPR/LBR between patients undergoing routine ET without ERA test and those who following pET with ERA (39.5 vs. 53.7%, OR 1.28, p = 0.49, 95%CI 0.92–1.77, I ( 2 ) = 0%) in relative GPP. Notably, the meta-analysis revealed that OPR/LBR of patients with RIF undergoing pET who had non-receptive ERA increased to the level of to those undergoing sET with receptive ERA (40.7 vs.49.6%, OR 0.94, p = 0.85, 95%CI 0.70–1.26, I ( 2 ) = 0%). Conclusion: Considering the approximately one third of infertile women could suffered from displaced WOI, the ERA test emerged as a promising tool. Although the present meta-analysis demonstrates that patients with general good-prognosis may not benefit from ERA, pET guided by ERA significantly increases the chances of pregnancy for non-receptive patients with RIF of endometrial origin.