Intra-uterine insemination versus fallopian tube sperm perfusion for non-tubal infertility

The comparison between Intrauterine Insemination and Fallopian Tube Sperm Perfusion Using FAST®System in Patients with Unexplained Infertility

Background

Controlled ovarian stimulation (COH) with intrauterine insemination (IUI) is commonly offered to infertile couples with patent fallopian tubes because it is simple, non-invasive and cost-effective technique. Another non-invasive method is fallopian tube sperm perfusion (FSP). This study was performed to compare the relative efficacy between FSP using fallopian sperm transfer (FAST) system and standard IUI in patients with unexplained infertility.

Materials and Methods

This prospective randomized study was conducted at the IVF Unit, Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Mazandaran University of Medical Sciences, Sari, Iran, from March 2011 to February 2012. A total of ninety patients with unexplained infertility underwent ovarian stimulation with clomiphene citrate and human menopausal gonadotropin (HMG). Patients were then randomly assigned into either group I (n=45) to undergo standard IUI or group II (n=45) to undergo FSP using FAST system.

Results

The patients’ basic characteristics, including age, primary infertility and duration of infertility, were not significantly different between two study groups. In the group I, there were 9 pregnancies (a pregnancy rate per cycle of 20%), whereas in the group II, 8 pregnancies occurred (a pregnancy rate per cycle of 17.8%, p>0.05).

Conclusion

FSP using FAST system offers no advantage over the standard IUI in order to increase pregnancy rate in patients with unexplained infertility.

Fallopian Tube Sperm Perfusion in Treatment of Nontubal Subfertility: Is It Crucial Step prior to ART?

Objective. To evaluate the efficacy of double Fallopian tube sperm perfusion in comparison with single-sperm perfusion in patients with nontubal subfertility undergoing controlled ovarian stimulation. Study Design. Sixty-six patients undergoing standard ovarian stimulation regimen were randomized to receive either single-sperm perfusion group 1 (n = 33) or double-sperm perfusion group 2 (n = 33). The same insemination method was performed in subsequent cycles if the patient does not become pregnant in the first one. A maximum of three cycles was performed. Fallopian tube sperm perfusion was carried out with pediatric Foleys catheter, which prevents reflux of sperm suspension. Semen was prepared by a classical swim-up technique. Results. A total of 133 cycles performed 68 single FSP cycles and 65 FSP cycles. There were group, 19 clinical pregnancies (29.2% per cycle) of which 16 ongoing pregnancies (24.6% per cycle) were obtained. These differences were statistically significant. The prevalence of multiple pregnancies, abortions, and ectopic pregnancies was similar in both groups. Conclusion. The results of this study indicate that there is a significant improvement of pregnancy rates in patients with nontubal subfertility when treated with double-sperm perfusion after controlled ovarian stimulation in comparison with single-sperm perfusion. Double-sperm perfusion is simple, easy to perform, inexpensive, and convenient for the patients with nontubal subfertility before adoption of other methods of assisted reproduction.