The effectiveness of IVF in unexplained infertility: a systematic Cochrane review. 2002,

BACKGROUND: IVF is an accepted treatment for unexplained infertility. The objective of this review was to determine whether, for unexplained infertility, IVF improves the probability of live birth compared with: (i) expectant management; (ii) clomiphene citrate (CC); (iii) intrauterine insemination (IUI); (iv) IUI with controlled ovarian stimulation; and (v) gamete intra-Fallopian transfer (GIFT). METHODS: This was based on a Cochrane review. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) which compared the effectiveness of IVF with expectant management, CC, IUI with or without controlled ovarian stimulation and GIFT were included. Patients included couples with unexplained infertility. Live birth rate per woman/couple was the main outcome measure. RESULTS: Nine RCT were identified. Five RCTs were included in the final meta-analysis. There were no comparative data for CC and live birth rates for expectant management or GIFT. There was no significant difference in clinical pregnancy rates between IVF and expectant management. There was no evidence of a difference in live birth rates between IVF and IUI either without (OR 1.96, 95% CI 0.88 to 4.36) or with (OR 1.15, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.42) ovarian stimulation. Clinical pregnancy rates with IVF were significantly higher compared with GIFT (OR 2.14, 95% CI 1.08 to 4.22) as were the multiple pregnancy rates (OR 6.25, 95% CI 1.70 to 23.00). Clinical heterogeneity was present among the studies. There was no evidence of statistical heterogeneity. CONCLUSIONS: The effectiveness of IVF in unexplained infertility remains unproven. Larger trials with adequate power are warranted.     

Infertility: Intra-uterine insemination or timed intercourse after ovarian stimulation for male subfertility? A controlled study

In this randomized trial we investigated whether intra-uterineinsemination (IUI) in couples with male subfertility leads toa higher probability of conception than timed intercourse afterovarian stimulation with human menopausal gonadotrophin (HMG)and human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG). A total of 76 couplesstarted 249 cycles, of which 47 were cancelled to prevent multiplepregnancies or hyperstimulation. After 202 completed treatmentcycles, 15 pregnancies occurred, 11 after IUI and four aftertimed intercourse. The pregnancy rate per completed cycle withIUI was 10.3% (95% confidence interval: 5.5–17.5%) and4.2% (1.2–10.1%) with timed intercourse. Compared withthe estimated spontaneous chance to conceive, IUI after ovarianstimulation appeared to be more effective in the first threecycles. We conclude that in subfertile couples with a male factor,IUI tends to improve the probability of conception as comparedto timed intercourse when ovarian stimulation is applied, andwe advise such treatment for three cycles.     

Stimulated intra-uterine insemination is not a natural choice for the treatment of unexplained subfertility. 'Effective treatment' or 'not a natural choice'?

Helping couples to choose appropriate therapy for their unexplained subfertility demands a review of evidence for treatment benefit and harm, in the context of both patients' and clinicians' experience and perspective. Ovulation induction (OI) with clomiphene (CC) or gonadotrophin (FSH) and intrauterine insemination (IUI) are often chosen before resorting to IVF. The appropriateness of starting with these low and intermediate intensity treatments is supported by evidence that CC/IUI increases cycle fecundity two- to three-fold, and FSH/IUI, three- to five-fold over the baseline chance of pregnancy in this patient group. While both OI/IUI and IVF have adverse effects which deserve vigorous attention, particularly multiple pregnancy and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS), the balance between benefits and costs often favours OI/IUI. The cost per live birth and potential for OHSS appears lower with OI/IUI, and the proportion of multiple pregnancies similar to that seen with IVF. For these as well as physical and spiritual reasons, OI/IUI is often a natural starting point for couples, especially when female age and duration of subfertility are favourable.     

Does ovarian hyperstimulation in intrauterine insemination for cervical factor subfertility improve pregnancy rates?

BACKGROUND: Intrauterine insemination (IUI) can be performed with or without controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH). Studies in which the additional benefit of COH on IUI for cervical factor subfertility is assessed are lacking. We assessed whether COH in IUI improved pregnancy rates in cervical factor subfertility. METHODS: We performed a historical cohort study among couples with cervical factor subfertility, treated with IUI. A cervical factor was diagnosed by a well-timed, non-progressive post-coital test with normal semen parameters. We compared ongoing pregnancy rate per cycle in groups treated with IUI with or without COH. We tabulated ongoing pregnancy rates per cycle number and compared the effectiveness of COH by stratified univariable analysis. RESULTS: We included 181 couples who underwent 330 cycles without COH and 417 cycles with COH. Ongoing pregnancy rates in IUI cycles without and with COH were 9.7% and 12.7%, respectively (odds ratio 1.4; 95% confidence interval 0.85-2.2). The pregnancy rates in IUI without COH in cycles 1, 2, 3 and 4 were 14%, 11%, 6% and 15%, respectively. For IUI with COH, these rates were 17%, 15%, 14% and 16%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Although our data indicate that COH improves the pregnancy rate over IUI without COH, IUI without COH generates acceptable pregnancy rates in couples with cervical factor subfertility. Since IUI without COH bears no increased risk for multiple pregnancy, this treatment should be seriously considered in couples with cervical factor subfertility.     

Intrauterine insemination versus Fallopian tube sperm perfusion in non-tubal subfertility: a systematic review based on a Cochrane review

BACKGROUND: The objective of this review was to compare the efficacy of Fallopian tube sperm perfusion (FSP) with intrauterine insemination (IUI) in the treatment of non-tubal subfertility. METHODS: The principles of the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group were employed. Only randomized controlled studies comparing FSP with IUI were included in this review. The main outcome measures included live birth rates and pregnancy rates per couple. RESULTS: Twenty-eight studies were found performing the comparison of interest. Overall six studies involving 474 couples were included in the meta-analysis. One study only assessed live birth rates, which resulted in no difference in outcome between FSP and IUI [odds ratio (OR) 1.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.39-3.53]. The results in pregnancy rate per couple revealed no statistically significant difference between FSP and IUI (OR 1.76, 95% CI 0.77-4.05). Subgroup analysis revealed that couples suffering from unexplained subfertility clearly benefit from FSP over IUI (OR 2.88, 95% CI 1.73-4.78). Excluding studies which used the Foley catheter for tubal perfusion resulted in a significant difference favouring FSP for all indications (OR 2.42, 95% CI 1.54-3.80). CONCLUSIONS: There is firm evidence that FSP gives rise to higher pregnancy rates in couples with unexplained subfertility and should therefore be advised in these couples. For other indications FSP has not been proven more effective compared with IUI. Results showed that the Foley catheter might not be effective for FSP. Future research should focus on comparing different types of catheters.     

Further considerations on natural or mild hyperstimulation cycles for intrauterine insemination treatment: effects on pregnancy and multiple pregnancy rates

BACKGROUND: The high iatrogenic multiple pregnancy rate associated with intrauterine insemination (IUI) in hyperstimulated cycles is becoming less acceptable. Therefore we investigated data from an earlier prospective trial with regard to the specific question of whether the application of mild hyperstimulation in IUI cycles could be an alternative strategy for obtaining acceptable pregnancy rates while preventing a high multiple pregnancy rate, compared with natural cycles for IUI. METHODS: Pregnancy outcome of 310 natural and 334 mildly hyperstimulated cycles for IUI in 171 couples with unexplained or mild male factor subfertility was analysed on a patient level with random coefficient models. RESULTS: Pregnancy rates were similar: 35 and 39.8% per couple in the natural and mildly hyperstimulated cycles respectively (P = 0.60). Multiple pregnancies, all twin pregnancies, were conceived significantly more frequently in the mild hyperstimulation group (27% of the pregnancies) than in the natural cycle group (4% of the pregnancies) (P = 0.01). All multiple pregnancies in the hyperstimulation group were conceived in multifollicular cycles. Multifollicular development was strongly associated with the application of mild hyperstimulation only (odds ratio 21.14, 95% confidence interval 8.15-54.79). CONCLUSION: The application of a mild hyperstimulation protocol as an alternative to a standard hyperstimulation protocol for IUI does not result in higher pregnancy rates than IUI in the natural cycle, while at the same time multiple pregnancies cannot be avoided. Therefore, there is no place for the use of gonadotrophins in IUI treatment.     

Comparison of different gonadotrophin preparations in intrauterine insemination cycles for the treatment of unexplained infertility: a prospective, randomized study

BACKGROUND: A comparison of the effectiveness of different gonadotrophin preparations in intrauterine insemination (IUI) cycles for patients with unexplained infertility was performed. METHODS: Two hundred and forty-one patients were prospectively randomized using computer-generated random numbers into three groups: 81 in the Follitropin alpha (Group I), 80 in the urinary FSH (uFSH) (Group II) and 80 in the hMG (Group III). The primary outcome was clinical pregnancy rate with duration of stimulation, total gonadotrophin dose, number of dominant follicles, clinical pregnancy rate, multiple pregnancy, miscarriage rate and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) rate being secondary outcomes. RESULTS: Clinical pregnancy rate was significantly higher in the rFSH group (25.9% in Follitropin alpha, 13.8% in uFSH and 12.5% in HMG groups; P = 0.04). There was no significant difference in terms of duration of stimulation, but mean FSH dose consumed per cycle was significantly lower in the recombinant FSH (rFSH) group compared with others (825 IU in Follitropin alpha, 1107 IU in uFSH and 1197 IU in HMG groups; P = 0.001). The number of follicles > or =16 mm diameter was significantly higher in the rFSH group compared with the uFSH and HMG groups (2.6 in Follitropin alpha, 1.3 in uFSH and 1.4 in HMG groups; P = 0.001). CONCLUSION: rFSH may result in a better outcome in IUI cycles for unexplained infertility.     

Controlled ovarian hyperstimulation and intrauterine insemination for treating male subfertility: a controlled study

In this randomized crossover trial we investigated whether the use of controlled ovarian hyperstimulation with low-dose human menopausal gonadotrophin in couples with male subfertility leads to a higher probability of conception when intrauterine insemination (IUI) is applied. We also investigated whether the efficacy of IUI in natural or stimulated cycles was related to the severity of male subfertility. Seventy-four couples completed 308 treatment cycles. Thirteen pregnancies occurred after IUI in a natural cycle (pregnancy rate per completed cycle: 8.4%) and 21 after IUI in a stimulated cycle (pregnancy rate per completed cycle: 13.7%). The difference between the two treatment modalities was not statistically significant. The efficacy of IUI in stimulated cycles was related to the severity of the semen defect. In couples with a total motile sperm count < 10 x 10(6), ovarian stimulation did not improve treatment outcome, while it did in couples with a total motile sperm count > or = 10 x 10(6). Compared with the expected chance of conceiving spontaneously without treatment, both natural and stimulated cycles improved the probability of conception. We conclude that, for the group as a whole, ovarian stimulation did not improve the probability of conception. However, in couples with less severe semen defects, ovarian stimulation did improve the probability of conception.      

Is controlled ovarian stimulation in intrauterine insemination an acceptable therapy in couples with unexplained non-conception in the perspective of multiple pregnancies?

BACKGROUND: Controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) with intrauterine insemination (IUI) is a common treatment in couples with unexplained non-conception. Induction of multifollicular growth is considered to improve pregnancy outcome, but it contains an increased risk of multiple pregnancies and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. In this study the impact of the number of follicles (>14 mm) on the ongoing pregnancy rate (PR) and multiple PR was evaluated in the first four treatment cycles. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed in all couples with unexplained non-conception undergoing COS-IUI in the Academic Hospital of Maastricht. The main outcome measure was ongoing PR. Secondary outcomes were ongoing multiple PR, number of follicles of >or=14 mm, and order of treatment cycle. RESULTS: Three hundred couples were included. No significant difference was found in ongoing PR between women with one, two, three or four follicles respectively (P=0.54), but in women with two or more follicles 12/73 pregnancies were multiples. Ongoing PR was highest in the first treatment cycle and declined significantly with increasing cycle order (P=0.006), while multiple PR did not change. CONCLUSIONS: In COS-IUI for unexplained non-conception, induction of more than one follicle did not improve the ongoing PR, but increased the risk of multiple pregnancies. Multiple PR remained high in the first four cycles with multifollicular stimulation. Therefore, in order to reduce the number of multiple pregnancies, in all IUI cycles for unexplained non-conception monofollicular growth should be aimed at.     

Urinary hMG versus recombinant FSH for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation following an agonist long down-regulation protocol in IVF or ICSI treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Since the most recent Cochrane review on hMG versus rFSH for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation following a long down-regulation protocol, several new trials have emerged. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials comparing the effectiveness of hMG versus rFSH following a long down-regulation protocol in IVF-ICSI cycles, on the primary outcome of live birth per woman randomized, as well as several other secondary outcomes. Searches were conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Direct, Cochrane Library and databases of abstracts (last search January 2007). RESULTS: Seven randomized trials, consisting of a total of 2159 randomized women, were identified. A meta-analysis of these trials showed a significant increase in live birth rate with hMG when compared with rFSH (relative risk, RR = 1.18, 95% CI: 1.02-1.38, P = 0.03). The heterogeneity test was non-significant (P = 0.97), suggesting that there was no statistical inconsistency between the seven studies. The pooled risk difference (RD) for the outcome of live birth rate was 4% (95% CI: 1-7%) for these study populations. There was an increase in clinical pregnancy rates with hMG when compared with rFSH (RR = 1.17, 95% CI 1.03-1.34). No significant differences were noted for gonadotrophin use, spontaneous abortion, multiple pregnancy, cancellation and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome rates. CONCLUSIONS: For the populations in the randomized trials, hMG was associated with a pooled 4% increase in live birth rate when compared with rFSH in IVF-ICSI treatment following a long down-regulation protocol.     

Effect of GnRH antagonists in FSH mildly stimulated intrauterine insemination cycles: a multicentre randomized trial

BACKGROUND: The usefulness of GnRH antagonists in mild controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) and intrauterine insemination (IUI) cycles is debated. METHODS: Two-hundred and ninety-nine couples with unexplained or mild male factor infertility were enrolled in this international multicentre randomized controlled trial. Women allocated to the GnRH antagonist group (n=148) received 50 IU recombinant FSH starting on day 3 of the menstrual cycle and Ganirelix 0.25 mg daily starting from the day in which a follicle with a mean diameter of 13-14 mm was visualized at ultrasound. Women allocated to the control group (n=151) were administered only 50 IU recombinant FSH starting on day 3 of the menstrual cycle. Couples were recruited only for their first treatment cycle. The primary outcome was the clinical pregnancy rate per initiated cycle. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics of the two treatment groups were similar. Clinical pregnancy rates per initiated cycle in women who did and did not receive GnRH antagonists were 12.2 and 12.6%, respectively (P=1.00). The relative risk of conception (95% confidence interval) for the use of GnRH antagonists was 1.0 (0.5-1.9). CONCLUSIONS: In mild COH and IUI cycles, any benefit of the use of GnRH antagonists in improving pregnancy rates is <2-fold increase.     

Timing ovulation for intrauterine insemination with a GnRH antagonist

BACKGROUND: We aimed to assess the efficacy of a GnRH antagonist in intrauterine insemination (IUI) cycles to increase number of mature ovulatory follicles and pregnancy rates. METHODS: Prospective randomized study. Women (18-38 years old) with primary/secondary infertility were included. Eighty-two patients were randomly assigned to controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) consisting of rFSH + GnRH antagonist or rFSH alone. RESULTS: A non-significant increase in the total amount of rFSH was seen in the GnRH antagonist group (707+/-240 IU) with respect to the control group (657+/-194 IU). The number of mature follicles (> or =16 mm) was significantly higher in the GnRH antagonist group than in the control group (2.4+/-1.4 versus 1.7+/-1.2, P<0.05). Pregnancy rates were significantly increased in the group of patients receiving the GnRH antagonist (38%) compared to the control group (14%). The only non-single pregnancy (triplets) occurred in the antagonist group. CONCLUSIONS: In this preliminary study, adding the GnRH antagonist to the COS protocol for IUI cycles significantly increased pregnancy rates. Nevertheless, these results may not be associated directly with the antagonist itself but with the fact that more mature ovulatory follicles are present by the day of the hCG. Finally, the risk for multiple gestations needs to be carefully evaluated.     

Intrauterine insemination: how many cycles should we perform?

BACKGROUND: In the past 20 years, various recommendations have been madeabout the maximum number of intrauterine insemination (IUI)cycles that should be performed, because evidence underpinninga possible limit is lacking. METHODS: We performed a multicentre, retrospective cohort analysis amongcouples treated with IUI up to nine cycles. Primary outcomemeasure was ongoing pregnancy rate (OPR) per cycle. CumulativeOPRs (COPR) after three, six and nine cycles of IUI were calculatedusing life-table analysis. Univariable and multivariable logisticregression analysis was performed to identify variables possiblyaffecting OPR's. RESULTS: Overall, 3714 couples with male, cervical or unexplained subfertilityunderwent 15 303 cycles of IUI. In 70% of cycles, controlledovarian hyperstimulation (COH) was used (51% clomiphene-citrate,19% gonadotropins). Mean OPR rate was 5.6% per cycle. OPR inthe seventh, eighth and ninth cycle were 5.1%, 6.7% and 4.6%,respectively. Taking censored patients into account, the calculatedCOPR was 18% after the third cycle, 30% after the seventh cycleand 41% after the ninth cycle. If censored patients were consideredto have no chance of conception, a crude COPR of 25% after ninecycles was found. Multivariable regression analysis showed nosignificant impact of age, type of subfertility, diagnosis,use of hyperstimulation or cycle number on OPR after the sixthtreatment cycle. CONCLUSIONS: OPR in high-order IUI cycles are acceptable, and do not offera rationale for cancellation before nine cycles. Using thistype of very mild COH, it may be reasonable to conduct up tonine cycles.     

Evaluation of intrauterine insemination with washed spermatozoa from the husband in the treatment of infertility.

In this study, we examined the efficacy of intrauterine insemination with washed spermatozoa from the husband (AIH/IUI) in the treatment of infertility. A total of 127 treatment cycles were completed (1.95 cycles per patient). The indications for AIH/IUI were male subfertility (group I: 53 couples), cervical factor (group II: four couples), male and cervical factor (group III: six couples) and unexplained infertility (group IV: two couples). Sperm washing caused a reduction of the sperm concentration from 52 x 10(6)/ml to 44 x 10(6)/ml (P less than 0.08) and motility from 49% to 45% (P less than 0.03). Twelve pregnancies were achieved (18.5% per couple and 9.5% per cycle): eight pregnancies in group I (15.1%), one in group II (25%) and three in group III (50%). Of the 12 pregnancies, eight occurred in the first insemination cycle, three in the second and one in the third (1.4 cycles/pregnancy). Sperm motility was significantly higher in the pregnant than in the non-pregnant group (65.5% versus 46.4%, respectively; P less than 0.004), whereas no significant difference was observed in the sperm concentration between these two groups (39 x 10(6)/ml and 54 x 10(6)/ml, respectively). In conclusion, AIH/IUI is a technically easy and non-invasive procedure which offers a satisfactory pregnancy rate in selected couples with male subfertility and/or cervical factor infertility.     

Cost-effectiveness of aromatase inhibitor co-treatment for controlled ovarian stimulation

BACKGROUND: To compare the clinical results and the cost-effectiveness of using the aromatase inhibitor, letrozole, in conjunction with FSH and FSH alone for controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) in patients undergoing intrauterine insemination (IUI) for a variety of indications. METHODS: Four hundred and thirty-two consecutive patients who underwent 872 IUI cycles were included. The study population was composed of two groups. Group I included 308 patients who underwent 589 IUI cycles with letrozole and FSH for the following indications: anovulation (143 cycles), male factor infertility (147 cycles), unexplained infertility (250 cycles), endometriosis (18 cycles) and combined indications (31 cycles). Group II included 124 patients who underwent 283 IUI cycles who received FSH only for the following indications: ovarian factor infertility (82 cycles), male factor infertility (66 cycles), unexplained infertility (114 cycles), endometriosis (13 cycles) and other indications (8 cycles). Main outcome measures included number of mature follicles >16 mm in diameter, dose of FSH used per cycle, clinical pregnancy rate and cost-effectiveness ratio per pregnancy. RESULTS: FSH dose required for ovarian stimulation was significantly lower when letrozole was used (P < 0.0001). Although a significantly higher number of follicles >16 mm and endometrial thickness at the day of hCG administration (P < 0.0001) were observed in Group II, pregnancy rate per started (14.4 versus 15.9%) and per completed cycles (15.77 versus 18.07%) was the same in Group I and Group II, respectively. IUI cancellation rate was significantly lower with letrozole treatment (P = 0.05%). The cost per cycle was significantly lower in Group I versus Group II (468.93 Can dollars +/- 418.18 versus 1067.28 +/- 921.43; P < 0.0001). The cost-effectiveness ratio was 3249.42 dollars in the letrozole group and 6712.00 dollars in the FSH-only group. CONCLUSION: A letrozole-FSH combination could be an effective ovarian stimulation protocol in IUI cycles. Such a protocol may be more cost-effective than FSH alone because of the difference of FSH dose and cost. A randomized controlled trial is needed to further substantiate this finding.     

Fallopian tube sperm perfusion (FSP) versus intra-uterine insemination (IUI) in the treatment of unexplained infertility: a prospective randomized study

Prospective randomization of 60 couples with unexplained infertilitywas performed for treatment either with intrauterine insemination(IUI), using a volume of 0.5 ml of the inseminate, or Fallopiantube sperm perfusion (FSP), using a volume of 4 ml of inseminate.The protocols for ovarian stimulation and induction of ovulationwere the same in the two groups. The two groups were similarconcerning age of the female at the start of treatment and thenumber of follicles > 15 mm diameter, the serum oestradiolconcentrations and the endometrial thickness on the day of humanchorionic gonadotrophin (HCG) administration. The mean (±SD)number of motile spermatozoa inseminated was significantly higherin the FSP group than in the IUI group (52 ± 5 x 10⁶and 28 ± 3 x 10⁶ respectively). In the FSP group, 30women were given a total of 52 treatment cycles; 14 clinicalpregnancies occurred in this group, giving a pregnancy rateof 26.9% per cycle and 46.7% per woman. In the IUI group, 28women were given a total of 51 treatment cycles; five clinicalpregnancies occurred, giving a pregnancy rate of 9.8% per cycleand 17.9% per woman. The pregnancy rates per cycle and per womanin the FSP group were significantly higher than in the IUI group(P < 0.05, chi-square test). This study indicates that inthe treatment of couples with unexplained infertility, Fallopiantube sperm perfusion (FSP) is more successful than intra-uterineinsemination (IUI).     

A randomized controlled trial evaluating metformin pre-treatment and co-administration in non-obese insulin-resistant women with polycystic ovary syndrome treated with controlled ovarian stimulation plus timed intercourse or intrauterine insemination

BACKGROUND: There are few data in the literature regarding the utility of metfomin before and during gonadotrophin administration in women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). The aim of the present study was to assess the effect of the pre-treatment and co-administration of metformin in infertile PCOS women treated with controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) followed by timed intercourse (TI) or intrauterine insemination (IUI). METHODS: Seventy insulin-resistant primary infertile women with PCOS were randomized to receive metformin cloridrate (850 mg twice daily; group A) or placebo tablets (two tablets daily; group B) for 3 months. Three trials of COS using highly purified urinary FSH (hpFSH) plus TI/IUI were performed. Number of ampoules of gonadotrophin used, duration of the ovarian stimulation, cycle cancellation, ovulation, pregnancy, abortion, live birth, mono-ovulatory cycles, multiple pregnancies and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) rates were assessed. RESULTS: No difference between groups was detected in ovulation, cycle cancellation, pregnancy, abortion, live birth, multiple pregnancies and OHSS rates. The mono-ovulatory cycle rates were significantly (P = 0.002) more frequent in group A than in group B, whereas the days of stimulation for non-cancelled cycles and the number of vials of gonadotrophins used were significantly (P < 0.001) higher in group A than in group B. CONCLUSION: In insulin-resistant women with PCOS, metformin pre-treatment and co-administration with hpFSH increases the mono-ovulatory cycles.     

Patients' preferences in deciding between intrauterine insemination and expectant management

BACKGROUND: Intrauterine insemination (IUI) is a commonly used treatment in subfertile couples. We assessed patients' preferences for IUI relative to expectant management. METHODS: Forty subfertile couples were offered scenarios in which the treatment-independent pregnancy chance was varied against a fixed pregnancy chance after IUI without or with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) of 8% and 12% per cycle, respectively. The treatment-independent pregnancy chance within 12 months was initially set at 100%, and subsequently reduced until couples switched preferences. We also investigated the impact of the risks of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) and multiple pregnancy on couples' preferences. RESULTS: When pregnancy was guaranteed within a year, all couples would opt for expectant management. Most couples switched to IUI without COH at a 60% chance of a treatment-independent pregnancy and to IUI with COH between a 40% and 60% chance. Where the risk of OHSS was set at 10%, a large majority of the couples preferred expectant management to IUI. At a multiple pregnancy risk of 100%, 77% of the couples would still prefer IUI. CONCLUSIONS: The majority of couples prefer IUI with or without COH when the treatment-independent pregnancy chance in the next 12 months is <50% and <40%, respectively. The risk of a multiple pregnancy does not affect their preference for IUI, whereas IUI is rejected when the risk of OHSS exceeds 10%.     

In-vivo transperitoneal fertilization

We present the technique of in-vivo transperitoneal fertilization (IVTPF) as a first approach to infertility treatment in couples with male subfertility or unexplained factors. The technique is statistically less successful but also less invasive than either gamete intra-Fallopian transfer (GIFT) or in-vitro fertilization - embryo transfer (IVFET) and offers considerable advantages over intrauterine insemination (IUI). The IVTPF technique involves transperitoneal transfer of processed spermatozoa within the pouch of Douglas after induction of ovulation. We report our 4-year experience with IVTPF which includes 136 treatment cycles in 89 couples. Eight pregnancies were achieved in 89 patients (9%) and 136 treatment cycles (7%). Fifty-one patients (57%) received IVTPF for only one treatment cycle; seven of the eight IVTPF pregnancies occurred in this group. An ectopic pregnancy resulted in one of the eight IVTPF pregnancies (13%). The functional quality of the sperm in those couples who achieved pregnancy was statistically superior to those couples who did not conceive. However, pregnancy was also obtained in case of severe oligozoospermia. Based on our experience, we feel IVTPF to be a very reasonable first approach in patients with no pelvic pathology and with infertility secondary to male factors or unexplained causes.     

Recombinant human FSH versus highly purified urinary FSH: a randomized study in intrauterine insemination with husbands' spermatozoa

A randomized trial was carried out comparing recombinant FSH (rFSH) and highly purified urinary FSH (uFSH) in intrauterine insemination (IUI) with husbands' spermatozoa. A total of 45 women received rFSH (139 cycles), while 46 women received uFSH (155 cycles). The starting dose was 150 IU/day s.c., beginning on the second day, and on days 6-7 the dose was adjusted according to ovarian response, assessed by vaginal ultrasound and plasma oestradiol concentration. The pregnancy rate according to the intention to treat was 57.8% in rFSH versus 52.2% in uFSH, the corrected pregnancy rates 56.8% and 52.2%, and the cumulative pregnancy rates 69.6% and 61.0%, but the differences were not statistically significant. The per cycle pregnancy rate was 18.12% in rFSH and 15.48% in u-FSH, also not statistically significant. In the rFSH group, the consumption of FSH ampoules per cycle was significantly lower (19.20 +/- 7.02 versus 23. 80 +/- 10.78; P < 0.0001). The ratio of oestradiol/FSH ampoules was significantly higher in rFSH (56.45 +/- 31.26 versus 46.41 +/- 29. 25; P < 0.001). These data indicate that, in IUI cycles, rFSH has a higher potency than uFSH.