Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Washington University School of Medicine, 4444 Forest Park Avenue, St. Louis, MO, 63108, USA.
Reproductive Medical Associates of St. Louis, 641 N New Ballas, Creve Coeur, MO, 63141, USA.
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2019 Feb;36(2):299-305. doi: 10.1007/s10815-018-1356-5. Epub 2018 Nov 5.
Implantation failure is a major limiting factor of successful in vitro fertilization (IVF). The objective of this study was to determine if endometrial mechanical stimulation (EMS) by endometrial biopsy in the luteal phase of the cycle prior to embryo transfer (ET) improves clinical outcomes in an unselected subfertile population.
Double-blind, randomized controlled trial of EMS versus sham biopsy and odds of clinical pregnancy after IVF and embryo transfer. Secondary outcomes included spontaneous miscarriage and live birth.
One hundred women enrolled and were randomized from 2013 to 2017. Enrollment was terminated after futility analysis showed no difference in clinical pregnancy between EMS versus control, 47.2% vs 61.7% (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.25-1.23, p = 0.15). There were no significant differences between women who underwent EMS and those who did not in terms of positive pregnancy test 54.7% vs 63.8% (OR 0.69, 95% CI 0.31-1.53, p = 0.36), miscarriage 7.5% vs 2.1% (OR 3.76 95% CI 0.41-34.85, p = 0.22), or live birth 43.4% vs 61.7% (OR 0.48 95% CI 0.21-1.06, p = 0.07).
EMS in the luteal phase of the cycle preceding embryo transfer does not improve clinical outcomes in an unselected subfertile population and may result in a lower live birth rate. We caution the routine use of EMS in an unselected population.
胚胎着床失败是体外受精(IVF)成功的主要限制因素。本研究旨在确定在胚胎移植(ET)前的黄体期进行子宫内膜机械刺激(EMS)是否能改善未经选择的亚生育人群的临床结局。
对黄体期 EMS 与假活检进行双盲、随机对照试验,并对 IVF 和胚胎移植后的临床妊娠几率进行评估。次要结局包括自然流产和活产。
2013 年至 2017 年期间,有 100 名女性入组并随机分组。在无效性分析显示 EMS 与对照组在临床妊娠率方面无差异后,入组被终止,分别为 47.2%和 61.7%(OR 0.55,95%CI 0.25-1.23,p=0.15)。接受 EMS 的女性与未接受 EMS 的女性在阳性妊娠试验方面没有显著差异,分别为 54.7%和 63.8%(OR 0.69,95%CI 0.31-1.53,p=0.36)、流产率分别为 7.5%和 2.1%(OR 3.76,95%CI 0.41-34.85,p=0.22)或活产率分别为 43.4%和 61.7%(OR 0.48,95%CI 0.21-1.06,p=0.07)。
在胚胎移植前的黄体期进行 EMS 并不能改善未经选择的亚生育人群的临床结局,反而可能导致活产率降低。我们提醒不要在未经选择的人群中常规使用 EMS。