Potential Pathophysiological Mechanisms of the Beneficial Role of Endometrial Injury in In Vitro Fertilization Outcome

Siristatidis, Charalampos; Vrachnis, Nikos; Vogiatzi, Paraskevi; Chrelias, Charalampos; Retamar, Andrea Quinteiro; Bettocchi, Stefano; Glujovsky, Demián

doi:10.1177/1933719114525270

Cited by 52 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 74 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the exact pathophysiological mechanisms remain unknown. 86 Evidence from two independent systematic reviews supports the use of endometrial injury during the luteal phase of the cycle before the onset of ovarian stimulation, as an intervention that leads to higher clinical pregnancy rates after IVF. 87,88 The majority of studies within the above meta-analyses included women with previous failed IVF cycles.…”

Section: Endometrial Injurymentioning

confidence: 99%

Prognostic Factors for IVF Success: Diagnostic Testing and Evidence-Based Interventions

Papathanasiou

Bhattacharya

2015

Semin Reprod Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Numerous tests and interventions have been proposed for optimizing performance in preparation for in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment. We critically appraised the available evidence underpinning some of the popular investigations and treatments, including the role of hysteroscopy, laparoscopy, ovarian reserve tests, sperm function tests, as well as the role of lifestyle modifications or surgery for endometriosis, fibroids, and endometrial polyps. We also reviewed the evidence behind novel techniques, such as the use of endometrial injury before IVF. Only a few of the aforementioned modalities are justified based on the available research evidence. Other factors may affect the uptake of a test or intervention before IVF, namely the complexity of the proposed modality, its potential for harm, and its cost-effectiveness.

show abstract

Section: Endometrial Injurymentioning

confidence: 99%

Prognostic Factors for IVF Success: Diagnostic Testing and Evidence-Based Interventions

Papathanasiou

Bhattacharya

2015

Semin Reprod Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Trans-vaginal Doppler pulsed ultrasound became an absolute necessity and an important tool for examining the female reproductive system as it is a non-invasive procedure to assess the uterine perfusion [8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Endometrial Injury and Sub Endometrial Doppler Study to Predict Uterine Receptivity in Women with Unexplained Infertility: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Farahat¹,

Omar²

2019

OJOG

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: The aim of this work was to compare the effectiveness and safety of endometrial scratching at different times of the menstrual cycle on cumulative pregnancy rate and also to assess and clarify its relationship and effect on sub-endometrial vasculature blood flow by Doppler ultrasound, in cases of unexplained infertility attempting to conceive spontaneously (without ovulation induction). Study Design: A prospective randomized clinical control study. Patients and Methods: A total of 252 eligible participants were included in the study and randomly allocated using block randomization into three groups: Group A (n = 84): endometrial scratching was performed during the pre-ovulatory days and Group B (n = 84): endometrial scratching has been done at day 7 of the cycle. Group C (control group): includes 84 cases without endometrial scratching. The Doppler ultrasound will be done. The pulsatility index (PI) and resistance index (RI) of endometrial and sub endometrial arteries were calculated. All women were followed up to 3 months. Results: Cumulative pregnancy rate is 21.42% and 28.57% in the study groups A and B respectively which is higher than group C (control group) (4.76%) but with statistically insignificant P-value = 0.254. There is statistically significant difference in RI & PI between the studied groups and the control group on day 13 (P value < 0.001). There is statistically significant difference in PI between day 13 and day 6 for the same group in both groups (A&B) (P value < 0.003), while there is no statistically significant difference in Group C (P value = 0.156). Conclusion: Endometrial scratching is a cost-effective and easy technique which may improve clinical pregnancy rates and endometrial blood flow in women with unexplained infertility.

show abstract

“…Another possible explanation for increased endometrial receptivity is the wound healing effect induced by endometrial sampling. A massive secretion of cytokines and growth factors in the wound healing process might have an additional favourable effect on uterine receptivity …”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of local endometrial injury on in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection outcomes: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Gui

Yang

et al. 2018

J of Obstet and Gynaecol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: Recent studies have revealed positive effects of endometrial injury on clinical pregnancy rates, but with inconsistent results. The aim of this meta-analysis was to assess the efficacy of endometrial injury (biopsy and/or hysteroscopy) as a potential treatment measure for implantation failure in the in vitro fertilization population. Methods: We searched in PubMed for studies comparing the efficacy of endometrial injury versus no intervention in women with at least one implantation failure. A random-effects model was used to evaluate the clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) and the live birth rate (LBR). Results: Seventeen studies (11 randomized and 6 non-randomized studies) were included in this meta-analysis, including 1864 women in the intervention group and 2193 women in the control group. Overall, the CPR and LBR were significantly higher in the intervention group than in the control group (for CPR, n = 3997, 16 studies, P < 0.00001, risk ratio (RR) = 1.47, 95% confidence interval [CI] [1.24, 1.74]; for LBR, n = 2361, 11 studies, P = 0.003, RR = 1.41, 95% CI [1.12, 1.78]). However, after excluding the nonrandomized studies, there was no significant difference in CPR (P = 0.29 for endometrial biopsy, P = 0.05 for hysteroscopy) and LBR (P = 0.23 for endometrial biopsy, P = 0.39 for hysteroscopy) between the intervention group and the control group. Conclusion: There is still insufficient evidence to support the use of endometrial injury in women with implantation failure. Robust randomized controlled studies should be designed and performed before clinical implementation of endometrial injury.

show abstract

Potential Pathophysiological Mechanisms of the Beneficial Role of Endometrial Injury in In Vitro Fertilization Outcome

Cited by 52 publications

References 74 publications

Prognostic Factors for IVF Success: Diagnostic Testing and Evidence-Based Interventions

Prognostic Factors for IVF Success: Diagnostic Testing and Evidence-Based Interventions

Endometrial Injury and Sub Endometrial Doppler Study to Predict Uterine Receptivity in Women with Unexplained Infertility: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Impact of local endometrial injury on in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection outcomes: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About