BackgroundAssisted Reproductive Technology (ART) has undergone considerable changes over the last decade, with consequences on ART outcomes in different regions of the world being unknown.MethodsWe conducted a systematic review of published national and regional ART registry data to assess how changes in clinical practice between 2004 and 2013 have impacted outcomes in Australia and New Zealand, Canada, Continental Europe, the United Kingdom (U.K.), Japan, Latin America, and the United States (U.S.). The data reflect 7,079,145 total ART cycles utilizing both fresh and previously cryopreserved embryos from autologous oocytes that resulted in 1,454,724 live births. This review focused on the following measures: ART cycle volume, use of cryopreserved embryos, single embryo transfer (SET), live birth rates in fresh and frozen-thawed cycles, and perinatal outcomes in recent years.ResultsSETs and utilization of frozen-thawed embryos increased worldwide over the study period. In 2012 SET utilization in all ART cycles was highest in Japan and Australia/New Zealand (82.6% and 76.3% respectively) and lowest in Latin America (16.0%). While gradual improvements in live birth rates were observed in most regions, some demonstrated declines. By 2012–2013, fresh cycle live birth rates were highest in the U.S. (29%) and lowest in Japan (5%). In Japan, the observed decline in fresh cycle live birth rate coincided with transition to minimal stimulation protocols, transfer of frozen-thawed rather than fresh embryos, and implementation of an SET policy. Similarly, implementation of an SET policy in parts of Canada was followed by a decline in fresh cycle live birth rate. Increasing live birth rates in frozen-thawed embryo cycles, seen all over the world, partially compensated for declines in fresh ART cycles. During 2012–2013 Australia/New Zealand and Japan reported the lowest multiple delivery rates of 5.6 and 4% respectively while the US had the highest of 27%. In recent years, preterm delivery rates in all regions ranged between 9.0 to 16.6% for singletons, 53.9 to 67.3% for twins, and 91.4 to 100% for triplets and higher order multiples. Inconsistencies in the way perinatal outcome data are presented by various registries, made comparison between regions difficult.ConclusionsART practices are characterized by outcome differences between regions. International consensus on the definition of ART success, which accounts for perinatal outcomes, may help to standardize worldwide ART practice and improve outcomes.Trial registrationPROSPERO (CRD42016033011)Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12958-016-0225-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

No abstract

This research was supported by the Foundation for Reproductive Medicine, a not-for-profit medical research foundation and intramural funds from the Center for Human Reproduction. N.G. and D.H.B are members of the Board of the Foundation for Reproductive Medicine. N.G., A.W. and D.H.B. received research support, lecture fees and travel support from a variety of pharmaceutical and medical device companies, none in any way related to the issues discussed in this manuscript. N.G. and D.H.B. are listed as co-inventors on two, already granted US user patents, which claim therapeutic benefits from DHEA supplementation in women with DFOR and DOR: both authors are also listed on additional pending patents in regard to DHEA supplementation and on pending patents, claiming diagnostic and therapeutic benefits from the determination of CGG repeats on the FMR1 gene. N.G. is the owner of the Center for Human Reproduction, where this research was performed.

Objective: To develop a consensus on the diagnostic criteria for chronic endometritis (CE) at hysteroscopy (HSC), and to evaluate these proposed criteria in a randomized-controlled observer study. Design: Systematic review of studies evaluating the diagnostic accuracy of HSC in CE diagnosis; Delphi consensus on hysteroscopic diagnostic criteria for CE; randomized-controlled observer study to evaluate the reproducibility of the proposed diagnostic criteria. Setting: Not applicable. Participant(s): Experts from different countries were involved in the systematic review and contributed to the Delphi consensus. Physicians from different countries were involved in the observer study. Intervention(s): After reaching consensus on the diagnostic criteria, the Delphi poll created a questionnaire including 100 hysteroscopic pictures (50 from women with CE [domain 1] and 50 from women without CE [domain 2]), with a single question per picture (Answer_A: suggestive of CE; answer B: not suggestive of CE). A total of 200 physicians were invited to take part in the observer study. Before completing the questionnaire, physicians were randomized to receive a description of the diagnostic criteria (group A) or no such information (group B). Main Outcome Measure(s): The primary outcome was to compare the questionnaire scores for the two groups of observers. The secondary outcome was to assess the interobserver agreement in the diagnosis of CE in each group. Result(s): A total of 126 physicians completed the questionnaire (62 in group A and 64 in group B). Observers in group A obtained higher total scores compared with those in group B (P< .001). Specifically, group A showed higher mean score in domain 1 (P< .001), but not in domain 2 (P¼ .975). A substantial agreement was found among observers in group A (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] 0.78), whereas a fair agreement was found among observers in group B (ICC 0.40). Conclusion(s):This randomized-controlled observer study found a positive impact of our criteria on physicians' ability to recognize CE. (Fertil Steril Ò 2019;112:162-73. Ó2019 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.) El resumen está disponible en Español al final del artículo.