Zygote intrafallopian transfer or in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer for the treatment of male-factor infertility: a prospective randomized trial.

OBJECTIVE: To compare zygote intrafallopian transfer (ZIFT) and in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF-ET) as treatments of male-factor infertility. DESIGN: Patients were prospectively randomized to ZIFT or IVF-ET. SETTING: In vitro fertilization program of the Centre for Reproductive Medicine of the Dutch-speaking Brussels Free University, Belgium, which is a tertiary referral institution. PATIENTS: One hundred fifty-seven couples were enrolled in the study. Inclusion criteria allowed only first trials of couples with long-standing infertility caused by a male factor. Female factors were excluded. INTERVENTIONS: In ZIFT, up to three fertilized oocytes were transferred into one single patient fallopian tube by means of laparoscopy 18 hours after insemination. In IVF-ET, cleaving embryos were replaced into the uterine cavity about 48 hours after insemination. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Fertilization and transfer rates, implantation and pregnancy rates, pregnancy outcome, and cost per procedure were evaluated. RESULTS: Implantation rates of 12.3% and 10% per replaced conceptus were achieved for ZIFT and IVF-ET, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates no therapeutic advantage of ZIFT over IVF-ET in male-factor infertility in terms of reproductive outcome or economic benefit.     

Comparison of zygote intrafallopian tube transfer and transcervical uterine embryo transfer in patients with repeated implantation failure

OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to evaluate the role of zygote intrafallopian transfer (ZIFT) procedure in patients with repeated failure of implantation. STUDY DESIGN: A total of 141 ZIFT cycles of 132 women and 145 embryo transfer (ET) cycles of 97 women in whom five or more embryos were transferred were included in this study. Transcervical uterine embryo transfer and ZIFT cycle outcome in patients with five or more previous implantation failure were compared. Embryos were transferred by laparoscopy into the fallopian tube 24-27 h following oocytes retrieval in the ZIFT group. In the ET group, embryos were transferred transcervically on the third day following oocytes retrieval. RESULTS: The mean age was 34+/-4.9 and 34.9+/-5.0 years in ZIFT and ET group, respectively. No difference was determined between the two groups regarding the basal FSH, E2 value on the day of HCG injection and the number of oocytes retrieved or fertilized. The implantation rate was 6.5% versus 7.2%, clinical pregnancy rate was 22.7% versus 24.8% and live birth rate was 21.2% versus 16.5% in ZIFT and ET groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of ZIFT procedure in patients with repeated implantation failure is not superior to transcervical uterine embryo transfer.     

Laparoscopic management of hydrosalpinges before in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer: salpingectomy versus proximal tubal occlusion

OBJECTIVE: To compare ovarian response and IVF-ET cycle outcome in patients with hydrosalpinges managed by either laparoscopic salpingectomy or proximal tubal occlusion. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis. SETTING: Tertiary-care assisted reproductive technology program. PATIENT(S): One hundred four consecutive fresh IVF-ET cycles in 94 patients with tubal-factor infertility. INTERVENTION(S): Laparoscopic salpingectomy (group 1: 35 cycles) or bipolar proximal tubal occlusion (group 2: 17 cycles), controlled ovarian hyperstimulation, and IVF-ET. Control groups consisted of both tubal-factor patients without hydrosalpinges (group 3: 37 cycles) and those with prior bilateral tubal ligation for sterilization (group 4: 15 cycles). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Uterine artery Doppler flow, controlled ovarian hyperstimulation response, and implantation and clinical pregnancy rates. RESULT(S): There were no differences in mean uterine artery pulsatility indices or ovarian response among any of the groups. A trend toward a higher cycle cancellation rate in group 1 did not approach statistical significance. Clinical pregnancy and implantation rates were not significantly different between group 1 (57.1%, 29.2 +/- 5.9%, respectively) and group 2 (46.7%, 19.4 +/- 6.1%, respectively) or compared with those of controls. CONCLUSION(S): [1] Management of hydrosalpinges by laparoscopic salpingectomy or bipolar proximal tubal occlusion yielded statistically similar responses to controlled ovarian hyperstimulation and IVF-ET cycle outcome. [2] The latter approach may be preferable in patients who present with dense pelvic adhesions and easy access only to the proximal fallopian tube.     

体外受精-胚胎移植周期第次对其妊娠的影响

目的 探讨体外受精－胚胎移植（IVF－ET）周期第次对其妊娠的影响。方法 回顾性分析妇性输卵管因素不孕行IVF－ET的908个周期的资料。结果 胺患者进行IVF－ET周期治疗的第1次、第2次、第3次、第4次及以上分4组，其种植率分别为17.6%、17.5%、8.7%、4.6%，经分别为41.1%、40.2%、21.1%、17.2%。进行IVF－ET周期第3次及以上的种植率肽临床妊娠率比周期第1次、第2次低，经x^2检验，有统计学意义（P＜0.001）。结论 随患者进行IVF－ET周期第次的增加，IVF－ET种植率及临床妊娠率逐渐下降，尤其是第3周期以上者更为明显。     

Gamete and zygote intrafallopian transfers and related techniques.

Until recently, most authors reported superior results (ie, higher implantation and pregnancy rates) with gamete intrafallopian transfer (GIFT) and zygote intrafallopian transfer (ZIFT) compared with results using in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer (IVF-ET). According to these investigators, the advantages of tubal over uterine transfer are related mainly to a stable tubal environment and a more appropriate arrival time of the embryo into the uterine cavity. However, more recently, the use of IVF-ET has been increasingly extended to etiologies other than tubal infertility. Indeed, the recent simplification of this technique and the achievement of pregnancy rates comparable to those obtained with tubal transfers have seriously questioned the value of ZIFT and any other type of tubal embryo transfer. As discussed in this review, the results obtained with various transfer procedures in nontubal infertility must still prove ZIFT to be a more effective procedure than IVF-ET. Efforts to develop transcervical methods of transfer to the tube have not translated into higher pregnancy rates than those with IVF-ET. On the other hand, laboratory conditions appear to affect embryos in ways not corrected by the tubal milieu. Negative effects of laboratory conditions on embryos are confirmed by differences in results between GIFT and ZIFT that are accentuated with age. The results obtained with GIFT in patients 40 years of age and older seem to emphasize not only the high compliance of the endometrial receptivity but also the relevance of the biologic potential of the embryos in the process of implantation at this age.     

Zygote intrafallopian transfer as a treatment for nontubal infertility: a 2-year study

Zygote intrafallopian transfer (ZIFT) was used as a treatment for long-standing nontubal infertility for a 2-year period. The overall clinical pregnancy rate for 114 tubal transfers was 40.4% with a delivery/ongoing rate of 34.2%. Concurrent use of in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF-ET) for tubal factor infertility gave significantly lower clinical pregnancy and delivery/ongoing rates (21.1% and 15.8%, respectively). The use of gamete intrafallopian transfer (GIFT) for nontubal infertility yielded a 32% clinical pregnancy rate and a 26% delivery rate for 53 transfers. Zygote intrafallopian transfer resulted in an implantation rate per zygote of 17% overall compared with 8.1% per embryo for IVF-ET and 11.2% per oocyte for GIFT. The transfer of three zygotes per patient gave the same clinical pregnancy rate as the transfer of four while reducing the incidence of multiple gestation from 19% to 7.8% per transfer. No significant decline in the clinical pregnancy or delivery rate was seen with ZIFT in women aged 25 through 39.     

Prospective evaluation of blastocyst stage transfer vs. zygote intrafallopian tube transfer in patients with repeated implantation failure

OBJECTIVE: To compare extended culture with blastocyst stage transfer and zygote intrafallopian transfer (ZIFT) in the management of IVF patients with repeated implantation failure. DESIGN: Prospective, nonrandomized study. SETTING: An IVF unit at a university hospital. PATIENT(S): Sixty-four infertile patients with more than three previous failed IVF-ET attempts. INTERVENTION(S): Patients were allocated to undergo either blastocyst stage transfer (Group 1; n = 32) or ZIFT (Group 2; n = 32). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Implantation, clinical pregnancy, and live birth rates. RESULT(S): Patient characteristics and response to stimulation were comparable for both groups. Totals of 84.3% and 97% of the patients underwent blastocyst transfer and ZIFT, respectively. Significantly more embryos were transferred through ZIFT (5.5+/-0.8) as compared with blastocyst transfer (2.3+/-1.4), and there were significantly more cycles with embryo cryopreservation in the ZIFT group as compared to the blastocyst transfer group (15/32 vs. 4/32, respectively). Implantation rate (13.6% vs. 1.4%), clinical pregnancy rate (40.6% vs. 3.1%), and live birth rates (38.7% vs. 0%) were all significantly higher in the ZIFT group as compared to the blastocyst transfer group, respectively. CONCLUSION(S): Zygote intrafallopian transfer is a powerful clinical tool in the management of patients with RIF. In contrast, blastocyst stage transfer fails to improve the outcome in this poor-prognosis group. The pathophysiology of RIF should be the subject of intense investigation to allow the introduction of appropriate therapeutic measures earlier in the course of treatment.     

Is tubal embryo transfer of any value? A meta-analysis and comparison with the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology database

OBJECTIVE: To analyze published randomized trials of ZIFT and ET via meta-analysis and compare the results with those of the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology database. DESIGN: Meta-analysis and comparison to SART data sets for 1991-1996. SETTING: University medical center. PATIENT(S): Patients from the literature with infertility, randomized to either tubal or uterine embryo transfer. INTERVENTION(S): All published articles in English were identified using an electronic database spanning January 1966 to December 1998 by keyword and text word searches, supplemented with a hand search through the references of original studies, review articles, and conference abstracts to identify randomized trials comparing ZIFT and IVF-ET. Additional data was obtained through correspondence with authors. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Implantation and clinical pregnancy rates were compared. Ectopic pregnancy rate was a secondary outcome measure. RESULT(S): Six randomized controlled trials including 548 cycles, 514 retrievals, and 388 transfers were reviewed. Demographic and stimulation and transfer details were comparable between the groups. Implantation and pregnancy rates did not differ significantly, and there was a trend toward increased risk of ectopic pregnancy with ZIFT. CONCLUSION(S): Published randomized trials suggest that there is no difference in implantation and pregnancy rates between women undergoing ZIFT and IVF-ET.     

Treatment with piroxicam before embryo transfer increases the pregnancy rate after in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer

OBJECTIVE: To examine the effect of beta-cyclodextrin piroxicam treatment for priming of the uterus on the pregnancy outcome of IVF-embryo transfer (ET) programs. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, double-blinded placebo-controlled clinical study. SETTING: Large urban medical center. PATIENT(S): One hundred eighty-eight consecutive cycles of fresh IVF-ET and 78 cycles of frozen-thawed ET. The patients underwent IVF because of tubal, male infertility, unexplained, or endometriosis factors. They were randomly divided into treatment and control groups. INTERVENTION(S): In the treatment group, 94 cycles in fresh ET and 39 cycles in frozen-thawed ET the patients received an oral dose of 10 mg of piroxicam. In the control group, the same number cycles corresponding to the treatment group were treated with placebo. Both groups started piroxicam or placebo treatment 1-2 hours before ET. Patients and staff were blinded to the treatment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Implantation rate (IR) and pregnancy rate (PR). RESULT(S): Piroxicam increased significantly IR (18.7%) and PR (46.8%) compared to the control group (8.6% and 27.6%, respectively) in fresh cycles. With the exception of an unexplained factor, patients with the tubal, male infertility, or endometriosis factor had significantly higher PR in the treatment group compared to the control group. The beneficial effect of piroxicam was found in patients less than 40 years old, but was not found in patients more than 40 years. In frozen-thawed cycles, there were statistically significant differences between the treatment group and the control group in IR (9.4% vs. 2.3%) and PR (25.6% vs. 7.7%), respectively. CONCLUSION(S): Our study showed that piroxicam increases IR and PR after IVF-ET in both fresh and frozen-thawed ET cycles. The beneficial effect seems to be more remarkable in patients less than 40 years old with tubal, male infertility, or endometriosis factors. These results suggest that piroxicam treatment before ET is very effective in the priming of a uterus suitable for embryo implantation. This is the first study to investigate the possible consequence of piroxicam for improving the PR after IVF-ET.     

Timing intra-Fallopian transfer procedures

With the gradual decline in the use of zygote intra-Fallopian transfer (ZIFT), current practice is to offer ZIFT almost exclusively to patients with repeated implantation failure (RIF). For practical reasons, the procedure is sometimes deferred by 1 day and embryo intra-Fallopian transfer (EIFT) is performed. The aim of the present study was to compare the reproductive outcome of ZIFT versus EIFT. In a retrospective analysis, 176 patients who failed in 7.65 +/- 3.7 previous IVF cycles underwent 200 ZIFT and 73 EIFT procedures. Implantation and live birth rates were compared for both groups. Patients in both groups were found comparable for demographic and clinical parameters. Similar numbers of oocytes were retrieved and fertilized in both groups, and 5.2 +/- 1.2 zygotes/embryos were transferred. Implantation and live birth rates (10.5 and 26.5% versus 10.9 and 24.7% for ZIFT and EIFT respectively) were comparable. It is concluded that tubal transfer of zygotes and day-2 cleavage stage embryos are equally effective.     

The outcome of in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer in women with polycystic ovary syndrome failing to conceive after ovulation induction with exogenous gonadotropins.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the outcome of in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF-ET) in women with refractory polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS). DESIGN: Retrospective case series with an age-matched control group. SETTING: Ovulation induction and IVF programs in a tertiary referral center. PATIENTS AND INTERVENTIONS: Nine patients with PCOS who failed standard ovulation induction treatment (clomiphene citrate plus greater than or equal to 6 ovulatory human menopausal gonadotropin [hMG] cycles) underwent 19 cycles of IVF-ET. Forty age-matched tubal factor patients who completed 40 cycles of IVF-ET served as a control group. OUTCOME MEASURES: Demographic features and IVF-ET cycle characteristics were compared using Student's t-test and Fisher's exact test. RESULTS: Cycles of IVF-ET in patients with PCOS were associated with higher estradiol levels (5,222 versus 4,009 pmol/L), lower hMG requirements (15.8 versus 19.6 vials), greater numbers of oocytes (7.6 versus 5.6), and lower fertilization rates (56% versus 75%) compared with tubal factor cycles (P less than 0.05). However, the number of embryos transferred (3.9 versus 4.0) and the clinical pregnancy rate per embryo transfer (24% versus 25%) did not differ significantly between the two groups. CONCLUSION: These results suggest that conception failure after six or more ovulatory hMG cycles in patients with PCOS does not adversely affect subsequent IVF performance.     

Zygote intrafallopian transfer among patients with repeated implantation failure

ObjectiveTo summarize the experience of a single center with laparoscopic zygote intrafallopian transfer (ZIFT) performed exclusively among patients with high-order repeated implantation failure (RIF) following in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer (IVF-ET).MethodsA retrospective cohort study was performed at the Edith Wolfson Medical Center, a tertiary referral university hospital located in Holon, Israel. A group of 176 patients with 8.15 ± 3.9 previously failed IVF-ET cycles underwent 280 ZIFT procedures between 1995 and 2010. The main outcome measure was the live birth rate per patient treated.ResultsIn all, there were 274 fresh and 6 frozen ZIFT cycles recorded in the study cohort, resulting in 96 clinical pregnancies per attempt (34.3%) and 72 live births (25.7%). The live birth rate per patient was 39.8%.ConclusionThe use of ZIFT remains a powerful tool in the clinical management of selected patients with high-order RIF. This procedure should be kept in mind when all other measures fail among patients with at least 1 unobstructed fallopian tube.     

Successful glucocorticoid treatment for patients with abnormal autoimmunity on in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer

Purpose: To analyze the effects of glucocorticoid treatment for patients with abnormal autoimmunity on IVF-ET outcomes, low-dose predonisolone or dexamethasone was administered in 51 IVF-ET cycles of 41 patients with positive antinuclear antibody (ANA), anti-DNA antibody, and/or lupus anticoagulant (LAC). Rates of clinical pregnancy and implantation in these patients were compared with those in 48 cycles without corticosteroid therapy. Autoantibody-negative patients were also treated with IVF-ET combined with (29 cycles) or without (57 cycles) glucocorticoid administration, and the pregnancy and implantation rates were investigated. Results: Without glucocorticoid treatment, the pregnancy rate per cycle and implantation rate per embryo in antibody-positive patients were 10.4 and 3.8%, respectively. Significant increases in pregnancy (35.3%) and implantation (13.2%) rates were observed with corticosteroid treatment. In antibody-negative patients, the rates of pregnancy and implantation showed no significant differences with versus without the glucocorticoid administration. Conclusions: Our results indicate that because autoimmune abnormalities may be at least one cause of implantation failure following IVF-ET, the combined use of low-dose corticosteroid can be effective for autoantibody-positive women.     

Embryo transfer to the uterus or the fallopian tube after in vitro fertilization yields similar results.

The outcome of ZIFT and IVF-ET was compared in consecutive nontubal factor patients in a prospective fashion. Groups did not differ in characteristics and were matched by the number of prezygotes/pre-embryos transferred. Overall, implantation, pregnancy, miscarriage, and ongoing PRs were not statistically different. These results suggest that ZIFT offers no significant advantage over IVF-ET for the treatment of nontubal infertility.     

Tubal catheterization for intrafallopian insemination and transvaginal gamete (GIFT) or zygote intrafallopian transfer (ZIFT): Our experience in a total of 1128 treatment cycles

Purpose Our purpose was to increase the number of fertile spermatozoa at the natural site of fertilization by retrograde tubal insemination (TV-IFI; transvaginal intrafallopian insemination) and also to perform transvaginal GIFT or ZIFT (TV-GIFT or TV-ZIFT) avoiding the laparoscopic procedure, especially in selected high-risk cases.Results The method was used in a total of 1128 treatment cycles (948 for TV-IFI and 180 for TV-GIFT or TV-ZIFT). TV-IFI was possible in 882 of the 948 cycles, resulting in 108 clinical pregnancies (12.24%). The remaining 66, due to bilateral tubal catheterization failure (6.9%), underwent intrauterine insemination (IUI) instead. Bilateral TV-IFI gave better results than unilateral, while combination with IUI did not seem to improve the outcome. Of the 180 cycles prepared for TV-GIFT or ZIFT the procedure was completed in 166, resulting in 24 clinical pregnancies (19% per patient and 14.45% per cycle). Due to bilateral tubal catheterization failure (8.2%) in the remaining 14 cycles (9 patients), IVF-ET was employed as an alternative.Conclusion Simple and cost-effective TV-IFI may achieve a reasonable pregnancy rate, justifying its application in cases with previously failed IUI and before entering the IVF program. On the other hand, TV-GIFT or ZIFT, although less effective than the classical laparoscopic approach and IVF-ET, is worth pursuing, considering its safety and the minimal surgical intervention without anesthesia, and especially in selected highsurgical risk and obese patients.     

Cycle-specific and cumulative fecundity in patients with endometriosis who are undergoing controlled ovarian hyperstimulation-intrauterine insemination or in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer

OBJECTIVE: To compare controlled ovarian hyperstimulation-intrauterine insemination (COH-IUI) or IVF-ET pregnancy rates per cycle (PR) and cycle and cumulative fecundity (f and cf) with COH-IUI or IVF-ET in endometriosis. DESIGN: Retrospective analysis. SETTING: Endometriosis research institute. PATIENT(S): Women with endometriosis and infertility (n = 313) who underwent consecutive COH-IUI (202 patients, 648 cycles), IVF-ET (111 patients, 139 cycles), or IVF-ET after failed COH-IUI (56 patients, 68 cycles). INTERVENTION(S): None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Crude PR and life table-estimated f and cf. RESULT(S): With COH-IUI, 69 patients conceived; 65 conceived with IVF-ET; and 30 conceived with IVF-ET after COH-IUI (PR 11%, 47%, and 44%). With COH-IUI, six-cycle cf was 41%, and f for cycles 1-6 was 15%, 12%, 8%, 7%, 7%, and 0. With IVF-ET, three-cycle cf was 73%, whereas f for cycles 1-3 was 47%, 27%, and 33%. First-cycle f with IVF-ET was significantly higher than cf of six COH-IUI cycles. When the data were stratified according to the stage of endometriosis and women's age, the benefit of IVF over COH was even more pronounced. Prior COH-IUI failure did not adversely affect IVF-ET outcome. CONCLUSION(S): In endometriosis, PR, f, and cf are significantly higher with IVF-ET than COH-IUI, especially in stage IV and in women >38 years of age. Considering adverse effects of prolonged ovarian stimulation on endometriosis, IVF-ET should be the first-line approach in the management of infertility in this disease. If COH-IUI is attempted, it should not exceed three to four cycles.     

子宫内膜异位症对体外受精-胚胎移植影响的临床研究

目的:评估子宫内膜异位症对体外受精-胚胎移植(IVF-ET)结局的影响。方法:回顾分析内异症患者70例行IVF-ET的结局,以输卵管因素IVF患者70例作为对照,统计两组患者促排卵反应、体外受精结果及妊娠结局。结果:与输卵管组相比,内异症组不孕年限及促排卵用药时间明显延长、Gn平均用量明显增多、hCG日内膜明显增厚(P<0.05),且形态不佳;内异症组平均获卵数、受精率、移植周期临床妊娠率、单胚着床率显著低于输卵管组(P<0.05);但是两组的卵裂率以及优质胚胎率无显著差异(P>0.05)。结论:内异症患者明显较差的卵巢反应性和子宫内膜状态影响IVF-ET结局。     

Does ovarian surgery for endometriomas impair the ovarian response to gonadotropin?

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the ovarian response to stimulation conducted for IVF treatment in women who have undergone conservative surgery for endometriomas. DESIGN: Retrospective study with prospective selection of participants and controls. SETTING: University infertility clinic. PATIENT(S): A series of 374 women who underwent in vitro fertilization (IVF). The study group consisted of 85 patients with ovarian endometriomas who had undergone laparoscopic surgery in an attempt to become pregnant, but had failed within a year of surgery. The control group consisted of 289 patients with tubal factor infertility. INTERVENTION(S): IVF-embryo transfer procedures. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Stimulation parameters, fertilization, implantation, and pregnancy rates were analyzed in both groups. RESULT(S): There was no significant difference between the two groups in stimulation parameters or IVF outcome. CONCLUSION(S): A total of 820 cycles were analyzed. A similar IVF-ET outcome was observed in patients with endometriosis after ablation of endometriomas compared to women with tubal factors. In conclusion, endometrioma surgery by internal wall vaporization does not impair IVF outcome. The clinical pregnancy rate was respectively 37.4% and 34.6% in the endometriosis group and the control group.     

Impact of endometriosis on implantation. Data from the Wilford Hall Medical Center IVF-ET Program

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effect of endometriosis on implantation. STUDY DESIGN: In a retrospective cohort study, 149 consecutive in vitro fertilization retrieved cycles were analyzed. Patients with endometriosis (n = 27, 31 cycles) were compared with a control group with tubal infertility (n = 104, 118 cycles). The main outcome measure was implantation rate (gestational sac per transferred embryo). RESULTS: The patients in the tubal infertility group were slightly younger and tended to have a better response to stimulation and increased number of oocytes retrieved than did the patients in the endometriosis group; however, there were no differences in fertilization rates, number of embryos transferred or clinical pregnancy rates per cycle between the endometriosis group and tubal infertility group. The overall clinical pregnancy rate per cycle was similar for women in the endometriosis and tubal infertility groups (54.8% and 55.1%, respectively). The implantation rate was not different in the endometriosis versus tubal infertility group (28% [28/100] and 29.8%, [108/363], respectively; P = .75, relative risk = .94, 95% confidence interval .66, 1.34). CONCLUSION: For women undergoing in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer with endometriosis, the implantation rate is not markedly different from that for women undergoing in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer with tubal infertility.     

Effects of the severity of tubo-ovarian disease and previous tubal surgery on the results of in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the ovarian response and in vitro fertilization/embryo transfer (IVF-ET) results in patients with tubal infertility and two ovaries, according to (1) the degree and extent of pelvic disease (isolated tubal or tubo-ovarian) and (2) previous adnexal surgical procedures. A total of 549 patients who underwent 1031 IVF-ET cycles were evaluated. Significant findings were as follows: (1) No differences were found in the number of preovulatory oocytes, fertilization rates, or serum estradiol levels in the follicular phase between any classes of tubo-ovarian disease. (2) Patients with a "frozen pelvis" had significantly fewer follicles aspirated than those in any other category, although they had equivalent numbers of preovulatory oocytes retrieved and pregnancy rates. (3) Patients with previous bilateral tubal ligation had higher pregnancy rates than patients with severe tubo-ovarian disease. (4) The type of prior pelvic surgical procedure had no effect on IVF-ET outcome. Although patients with no cause of infertility other than tubal ligation had better results, these patients had previously proven fertility. We conclude that neither the stage of tubo-ovarian disease nor any history of pelvic adhesions or tubal surgery has a significant impact on the efficiency of IVF-ET.