Suppr超能文献

使用油基或水基造影剂进行输卵管冲洗:我们能否识别出表明治疗益处的标志物?

Tubal flushing with oil- or water-based contrast medium: can we identify markers that indicate treatment benefit?

作者信息

van Rijswijk Joukje, van Welie Nienke, Dreyer Kim, Tajik Parvin, Lambalk Cornelis B, Hompes Peter, Mijatovic Velja, Mol Ben W J, Zafarmand Mohammad H

机构信息

Department of Reproductive Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

Centre for Reproductive Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.

出版信息

Hum Reprod Open. 2019 Jul 18;2019(3):hoz015. doi: 10.1093/hropen/hoz015. eCollection 2019.

Abstract

STUDY QUESTION

Can we identify patient characteristics that distinguish which ovulatory infertile women undergoing hysterosalpingography (HSG) benefit more or less from flushing with oil-based contrast medium compared to water-based contrast medium?

SUMMARY ANSWER

In ovulatory infertile women, HSG with oil-based contrast medium resulted in higher 6-month ongoing pregnancy and live birth rates as compared to HSG with water-based contrast medium and this treatment effect was independent of characteristics of the couple.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

We recently showed that in infertile women undergoing HSG, flushing with oil-based contrast medium resulted in more ongoing pregnancies than flushing with water-based contrast medium.

STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION

We used data from our randomized clinical trial (RCT) in which 1,119 ovulatory infertile women undergoing HSG during fertility work-up were randomized for use of oil-based ( = 557) or water-based ( = 562) contrast medium.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING METHODS: We built logistic regression models to predict ongoing pregnancy and live birth (secondary outcome) as a function of the specific contrast, the specific marker, and marker-by-contrast-interaction. Markers considered were female age, maternal ethnicity, female smoking, body mass index (BMI), duration of infertility, infertility being primary or secondary, sperm quality, and previous appendectomy.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The 6-month ongoing pregnancy rates in the overall population were 39.7% after use of oil-based contrast versus 29.1% after use of water-based contrast medium [relative risk (RR), 1.37; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.16-1.61;  < 0.001]. Among the studied baseline characteristics, BMI ( = 0.002) and semen volume ( = 0.02) were statistically significant prognosticators. The treatment effect of oil-based contrast was stronger in women with a BMI ≤30 kg/m [RR, 1.54; 95% CI, 1.23-1.92;  = 0.002], and in women whose partner had a semen volume >3 ml [RR, 1.77; 95% CI, 1.28-2.46;  = 0.02]. Also, in women who smoked, the treatment effect of flushing with oil was stronger, but this interaction did not reach statistical significance ( = 0.066). We found no positive effect of oil-based contrast in obese women. We found similar but weaker associations for live birth, which was probably due to lower number of events resulting in less power.

LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION

The RCT was restricted to infertile ovulatory women younger than 39 years of age without endocrinological disorders and at low risk for tubal pathology. Our results should not be generalized to infertile women who do not share these features.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

All infertile, ovulatory women younger than 39 years with a low risk for tubal pathology will benefit from an HSG with oil-based contrast; therefore, this should be offered to them after fertility work-up.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: The original H2Oil RCT was an investigator-initiated study that was funded by the two academic institutions (AMC and VUmc) of the Amsterdam UMC. The study displayed in this paper was funded by an unconditional research grant from Guerbet. B.W.M. is supported by an NHMRC Practitioner Fellowship (GNT1082548). K.D. reports consultancy for Guerbet, during the conduct of the study, and also reports research grants from Guerbet. C.B.L. reports grants from Guerbet, during the conduct of the study, and grants from Ferring, grants from Merck, and personal fees from Ferring, outside the submitted work. P.H. reports grants from Guerbet, during the conduct of the study, and grants from Ferring and Merck, outside the submitted work. V.M. reports receiving travel and speakers fee as well as research grants from Guerbet. B.W.M. reports consultancy for ObsEva, Merck, Merck KGaA, and Guerbet, and research grants from Guerbet and Merck. The other authors have no conflict of interest to declare.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NTR 3270 www.trialregister.nl.

TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE

1 February 2012.

DATE OF FIRST PATIENT’S ENROLMENT: 3 February 2012.

摘要

研究问题

对于接受子宫输卵管造影术(HSG)的排卵性不孕女性,我们能否确定哪些患者特征能区分使用油基造影剂冲洗与使用水基造影剂冲洗相比,哪些患者受益更多或更少?

简要回答

在排卵性不孕女性中,与使用水基造影剂的HSG相比,使用油基造影剂的HSG导致6个月持续妊娠率和活产率更高,且这种治疗效果与夫妻双方的特征无关。

已知信息

我们最近表明,在接受HSG的不孕女性中,使用油基造影剂冲洗比使用水基造影剂冲洗能带来更多的持续妊娠。

研究设计、规模、持续时间:我们使用了来自我们的随机临床试验(RCT)的数据,其中1119名在生育检查期间接受HSG的排卵性不孕女性被随机分配使用油基造影剂(n = 557)或水基造影剂(n = 562)。

参与者/材料、设置、方法:我们建立了逻辑回归模型,以预测持续妊娠和活产(次要结局)作为特定造影剂、特定标志物以及标志物与造影剂相互作用的函数。考虑的标志物包括女性年龄、母亲种族、女性吸烟情况、体重指数(BMI)、不孕持续时间、不孕是原发性还是继发性、精子质量以及既往阑尾切除术史。

主要结果及机遇的作用

总体人群中,使用油基造影剂后6个月的持续妊娠率为39.7%,而使用水基造影剂后为29.1%[相对风险(RR),1.37;95%置信区间(CI),1.16 - 1.61;P < 0.001]。在所研究的基线特征中,BMI(P = 0.002)和精液量(P = 0.02)是具有统计学意义的预后因素。油基造影剂的治疗效果在BMI≤30 kg/m²的女性中更强[RR,1.54;95% CI,1.23 - 1.92;P = 0.002],以及在其伴侣精液量>3 ml的女性中更强[RR,1.77;95% CI,1.28 - 2.46;P = 0.02]。此外,在吸烟女性中,用油冲洗的治疗效果更强,但这种相互作用未达到统计学意义(P = 0.066)。我们发现油基造影剂对肥胖女性没有积极作用。对于活产,我们发现了类似但较弱的关联,这可能是由于事件数量较少导致检验效能较低。

局限性、谨慎的原因:该RCT仅限于年龄小于39岁、无内分泌疾病且输卵管病变风险低的排卵性不孕女性。我们的结果不应推广到不具备这些特征的不孕女性。

研究结果的更广泛影响

所有年龄小于39岁、输卵管病变风险低的排卵性不孕女性将从使用油基造影剂的HSG中受益;因此,在生育检查后应向她们提供这种检查。

研究资金/利益冲突:最初的H2Oil RCT是一项由研究者发起的研究,由阿姆斯特丹大学医学中心的两个学术机构(AMC和VUmc)资助。本文所展示的研究由Guerbet提供的无条件研究资助。B.W.M.得到了澳大利亚国家卫生与医学研究委员会从业者奖学金(GNT1082548)的支持。K.D.在研究进行期间报告了为Guerbet提供的咨询服务,并且还报告了来自Guerbet的研究资助。C.B.L.在研究进行期间报告了来自Guerbet的资助,以及来自辉凌、默克的资助,以及在提交工作之外来自辉凌的个人费用。P.H.在研究进行期间报告了来自Guerbet的资助,以及在提交工作之外来自辉凌和默克的资助。V.M.报告在研究进行期间接受了Guerbet提供的差旅和演讲费用以及研究资助。B.W.M.报告为ObsEva、默克、默克集团和Guerbet提供咨询服务,以及来自Guerbet和默克的研究资助。其他作者声明无利益冲突。

试验注册号

NTR 3270 www.trialregister.nl。

试验注册日期

2012年2月1日。

首例患者入组日期

2012年2月3日。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/e3e7/6638263/9e8c436a5b1f/hoz015f1.jpg

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验