Heparin for assisted reproduction

Androgens (dehydroepiandrosterone or testosterone) for women undergoing assisted reproduction

BACKGROUND

Practitioners in the field of assisted reproductive technology (ART) continually seek alternative or adjunct treatments to improve ART outcomes. This Cochrane review investigates the adjunct use of synthetic versions of two naturally produced hormones, dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) and testosterone (T), in assisted reproduction. Steroid hormones are proposed to increase conception rates by positively affecting follicular response to gonadotrophin stimulation. This may lead to a greater oocyte yield and, subsequently, an increased chance of pregnancy.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of DHEA and T as pre- or co-treatments in infertile women undergoing assisted reproduction.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic databases up to 8 January 2024: the Gynaecology and Fertility Group (CGF) Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and trial registries for ongoing trials. We also searched citation indexes, Web of Science, PubMed, and OpenGrey. We searched the reference lists of relevant studies and contacted experts in the field for any additional trials. There were no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing DHEA or T as an adjunct treatment to any other active intervention, placebo, or no treatment in women undergoing assisted reproduction.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies, extracted relevant data, and assessed risk of bias. We pooled data from studies using fixed-effect models. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) for each dichotomous outcome. Analyses were stratified by type of treatment. We assessed the certainty of evidence for the main findings using GRADE methods.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 29 RCTs. There were 1599 women in the intervention group and 1469 in the control group. Apart from three trials, the trial participants were women identified as 'poor responders' to standard in vitro fertilisation (IVF) protocols. The included trials compared either T or DHEA treatment with placebo or no treatment. Pre-treatment with DHEA versus placebo/no treatment: DHEA likely results in little to no difference in live birth/ongoing pregnancy rates (OR 1.30, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.95 to 1.76; I² = 16%, 9 RCTs, N = 1433, moderate certainty evidence). This suggests that in women with a 12% chance of live birth/ongoing pregnancy with placebo or no treatment, the live birth/ongoing pregnancy rate in women using DHEA will be between 12% and 20%. DHEA likely does not decrease miscarriage rates (OR 0.85, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.37; I² = 0%, 10 RCTs, N =1601, moderate certainty evidence). DHEA likely results in little to no difference in clinical pregnancy rates (OR 1.18, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.49; I² = 0%, 13 RCTs, N = 1886, moderate certainty evidence). This suggests that in women with a 17% chance of clinical pregnancy with placebo or no treatment, the clinical pregnancy rate in women using DHEA will be between 16% and 24%. We are very uncertain about the effect of DHEA on multiple pregnancy (OR 3.05, 95% CI 0.47 to 19.66; 7 RCTs, N = 463, very low certainty evidence). Pre-treatment with T versus placebo/no treatment: T likely improves live birth rates (OR 2.53, 95% CI 1.61 to 3.99; I² = 0%, 8 RCTs, N = 716, moderate certainty evidence). This suggests that in women with a 10% chance of live birth with placebo or no treatment, the live birth rate in women using T will be between 15% and 30%. T likely does not decrease miscarriage rates (OR 1.63, 95% CI 0.76 to 3.51; I² = 0%, 9 RCTs, N = 755, moderate certainty evidence). T likely increases clinical pregnancy rates (OR 2.17, 95% CI 1.54 to 3.06; I² = 0%, 13 RCTs, N = 1152, moderate certainty evidence). This suggests that in women with a 12% chance of clinical pregnancy with placebo or no treatment, the clinical pregnancy rate in women using T will be between 17% and 29%. We are very uncertain about the effect of T on multiple pregnancy (OR 2.56, 95% CI 0.59 to 11.20; 5 RCTs, N = 449, very low certainty evidence). We are uncertain about the effect of T versus oestradiol or T versus oestradiol + oral contraceptive pills. The certainty of the evidence was moderate to very low, the main limitations being lack of blinding in the included trials, inadequate reporting of study methods, and low event and sample sizes in the trials. Data on adverse events were sparse; any reported events were minor.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Pre-treatment with T likely improves, and pre-treatment with DHEA likely results in little to no difference, in live birth and clinical pregnancy rates in women undergoing IVF who have been identified as poor responders. DHEA and T probably do not decrease miscarriage rates in women under IVF treatment. The effects of DHEA and T on multiple pregnancy are uncertain. Data regarding adverse events were very limited; any reported events were minor. Research is needed to identify the optimal duration of treatment with T. Future studies should include data collection on adverse events and multiple pregnancy.

Oxytocin antagonists for assisted reproduction

BACKGROUND

Embryo transfer (ET) is a crucial step of in vitro fertilisation (IVF) treatment, and involves placing the embryo(s) in the woman's uterus. There is a negative association between endometrial wave-like activity (contractile activities) at the time of ET and clinical pregnancy, but no specific treatment is currently used in clinical practice to counteract their effects. Oxytocin is a hormone produced by the hypothalamus and released by the posterior pituitary. Its main role involves generating uterine contractions during and after childbirth. Atosiban is the best known oxytocin antagonist (and is also a vasopressin antagonist), and it is commonly used to delay premature labour by halting uterine contractions. Other oxytocin antagonists include barusiban, nolasiban, epelsiban, and retosiban. Administration of oxytocin antagonists around the time of ET has been proposed as a means to reduce uterine contractions that may interfere with embryo implantation. The intervention involves administering the medication before, during, or after the ET (or a combination).

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of oxytocin antagonists around the time of ET in women undergoing assisted reproduction.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility (CGF) Group trials register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL, and two trials registers in March 2021; and checked references and contacted study authors and experts in the field to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of the use of oxytocin antagonists for women undergoing ET, compared with the non-use of this intervention, the use of placebo, or the use of another similar drug.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane. Primary review outcomes were live birth and miscarriage; secondary outcomes were clinical pregnancy and other adverse events.

MAIN RESULTS

We included nine studies (including one comprising three separate trials, 3733 women analysed in total) investigating the role of three different oxytocin antagonists administered intravenously (atosiban), subcutaneously (barusiban), or orally (nolasiban). We found very low- to high-certainty evidence: the main limitations were serious risk of bias due to poor reporting of study methods, and serious or very serious imprecision. Intravenous atosiban versus normal saline or no intervention We are uncertain of the effect of intravenous atosiban on live birth rate (risk ratio (RR) 1.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.88 to 1.24; 1 RCT, N = 800; low-certainty evidence). In a clinic with a live birth rate of 38% per cycle, the use of intravenous atosiban would be associated with a live birth rate ranging from 33.4% to 47.1%. We are uncertain whether intravenous atosiban influences miscarriage rate (RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.56; 5 RCTs, N = 1424; I² = 0%; very low-certainty evidence). In a clinic with a miscarriage rate of 7.2% per cycle, the use of intravenous atosiban would be associated with a miscarriage rate ranging from 5.4% to 11.2%. Intravenous atosiban may increase clinical pregnancy rate (RR 1.50, 95% CI 1.18 to 1.89; 7 RCTs, N = 1646; I² = 69%; low-certainty evidence), and we are uncertain whether multiple or ectopic pregnancy and other complication rates were influenced by the use of intravenous atosiban (very low-certainty evidence). Subcutaneous barusiban versus placebo One study investigated barusiban, but did not report on live birth or miscarriage. We are uncertain whether subcutaneous barusiban influences clinical pregnancy rate (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.35; 1 RCT, N = 255; very low-certainty evidence). Trialists reported more mild to moderate injection site reactions with barusiban than with placebo, but there was no difference in severe reactions. They reported no serious drug reactions; and comparable neonatal outcome between groups. Oral nolasiban versus placebo Nolasiban does not increase live birth rate (RR 1.13, 95% CI 0.99 to 1.28; 3 RCTs, N = 1832; I² = 0%; high-certainty evidence). In a clinic with a live birth rate of 33% per cycle, the use of oral nolasiban would be associated with a live birth rate ranging from 32.7% to 42.2%. We are uncertain of the effect of oral nolasiban on miscarriage rate (RR 1.45, 95% CI 0.73 to 2.88; 3 RCTs, N = 1832; I² = 0%; low-certainty evidence). In a clinic with a miscarriage rate of 1.5% per cycle, the use of oral nolasiban would be associated with a miscarriage rate ranging from 1.1% to 4.3%. Oral nolasiban improves clinical pregnancy rate (RR 1.15, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.30; 3 RCTs, N = 1832; I² = 0%; high-certainty evidence), and probably does not increase multiple or ectopic pregnancy, or other complication rates (moderate-certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

We are uncertain whether intravenous atosiban improves pregnancy outcomes for women undergoing assisted reproductive technology. This conclusion is based on currently available data from seven RCTs, which provided very low- to low-certainty evidence across studies. We could draw no clear conclusions about subcutaneous barusiban, based on limited data from one RCT. Further large well-designed RCTs reporting on live births and adverse clinical outcomes are still required to clarify the exact role of atosiban and barusiban before ET. Oral nolasiban appears to improve clinical pregnancy rate but not live birth rate, with an uncertain effect on miscarriage and adverse events. This conclusion is based on a phased study comprising three trials that provided low- to high-certainty evidence. Further large, well-designed RCTs, reporting on live births and adverse clinical outcomes, should focus on identifying the subgroups of women who are likely to benefit from this intervention.

Proteomics based drug repositioning applied to improve in vitro fertilization implantation: an artificial intelligence model

Embryo implantation is one of the most inefficient steps in assisted reproduction, so the identifying drugs with a potential clinical application to improve it has a strong interest. This work applies artificial intelligence and systems biology-based mathematical modeling strategies to unveil potential treatments by computationally analyzing and integrating available molecular and clinical data from patients. The mathematical models of embryo implantation computationally generated here simulate the molecular networks underneath this biological process. Once generated, these models were analyzed in order to identify potential repositioned drugs (drugs already used for other indications) able to improve embryo implantation by modulating the molecular pathways involved. Interestingly, the repositioning analysis has identified drugs considering two endpoints: (1) drugs able to modulate the activity of proteins whose role in embryo implantation is already bibliographically acknowledged, and (2) drugs that modulate key proteins in embryo implantation previously predicted through a mechanistic analysis of the mathematical models. This second approach increases the scope open for examination and potential novelty of the repositioning strategy. As a result, a list of 23 drug candidates to improve embryo implantation after IVF was identified by the mathematical models. This list includes many of the compounds already tested for this purpose, which reinforces the predictive capacity of our approach, together with novel repositioned candidates (e.g., Infliximab, Polaprezinc, and Amrinone). In conclusion, the present study exploits existing molecular and clinical information to offer new hypotheses regarding molecular mechanisms in embryo implantation and therapeutic candidates to improve it. This information will be very useful to guide future research.Abbreviations: IVF: in vitro fertilization; EI: Embryo implantation; TPMS: Therapeutic Performance Mapping System; MM: mathematical models; ANN: Artificial Neuronal Networks; TNFα: tumour necrosis factor factor-alpha; HSPs: heat shock proteins; VEGF: vascular endothelial growth factor; PPARA: peroxisome proliferator activated receptor-α PXR: pregnane X receptor; TTR: transthyretin; BED: Biological Effectors Database; MLP: multilayer perceptron.

Low molecular weight heparins use in pregnancy: a practice survey from Greece and a review of the literature

Background

Use of LMWH in pregnancy is not only limited to VTE management, but it extends, to the management of vascular gestational complications and the optimization of IVF pregnancies despite the lack of concrete scientific evidence. In this context, we conducted the present study aiming to gain insights regarding the use of LMWH during pregnancy and puerperium. We recorded indication for use, diagnostic work-up as well as the safety and efficacy of the treatment, trying to elucidate the clinical practice in our country.

Methods

We analyzed data regarding 818 pregnant women received LMWH during 2010-2015.Our cohort had a median age of 33.9 years and a BMI of 23.6.There were 4 groups: those with a history of VTE [Group-A: 76], those with pregnancy complications [Group-B: 445], those undergoing IVF [Group-C: 132] and those carrying prothrombotic tendency (thrombophilia, family history of VTE, other) [Group-D: 165]. Mean duration of LMWH administration was 8.6 ± 1.5 months. Out of the total number, 440 received LMWH in fixed prophylactic dose, 272 in higher prophylactic-weight adjusted dose and 106 in therapeutic dose. Moreover, 152 women received in addition low-dose acetylsalicylic acid (ASA). 93.8% of pregnancies were single and 6.2% were multiple ones. Live births occurred in 98.7% of pregnancies.

Results

Anticoagulation was efficacious and well tolerated. Seventeen VTE events were recorded; 7 of them antepartum and 10 postpartum. No major bleeding events were observed while 13 clinical relevant non-major bleeding events were recorded. Regarding gestational vascular complications, 28 IUGR events were recorded, as well as 48 cases of preterm labor of which 12 were concomitant with IUGR (25%). Six early pregnancy losses were recorded; there were 3 fetal deaths and 3 cases of pre-eclampsia/eclampsia.

Conclusions

LMWHs are used extensively during pregnancy and puerperium in Greece for VTE treatment and prophylaxis and for a variety of other indications as well. Although the drug has been shown to be both safe and efficacious, its use for some indications has no proven scientific evidence. In order to clearly define the role of LMWHs in pregnancy, beyond thromboprophylaxis, large prospective studies are required, which could be based on the conclusions of this study.

Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs for assisted reproductive technology

BACKGROUND

Despite substantial improvements in the success of treatments through assisted reproduction technologies (ART), live birth rates remain constantly low, and practitioners are seeking aetiologic treatments to improve the outcomes.Local inflammatory response is believed to contribute to implantation failure, where prostaglandins may increase uterine contractions and decrease uterine receptivity, decreasing the possibility of an IVF cycle leading to successful embryo transfer. In this context, nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have been employed to inhibit the negative prostaglandin effect. They are often offered in clinical practice to improve ART outcomes, but current robust evidence on their efficacy is lacking.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs as co-treatments in infertile women undergoing assisted reproduction, in terms of improving live birth and miscarriage rates.

SEARCH METHODS

We designed the search using standard Cochrane methods and performed it on databases from their inception to 20 February 2019.We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register of controlled trials, CENTRAL via the Cochrane Central Register of Studies Online, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, and the trial registers for ongoing and registered trials, grey literature and treatment guidelines. We handsearched reference lists of relevant systematic reviews and RCTs, and PubMed and Google for any recent trials. There were no restrictions by language or country of origin.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All RCTs on the use of NSAIDs as co-treatment during an ART cycle compared with no use or the use of placebo or any other similar drug, along with the comparison of any NSAID to another.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane. Our primary outcomes were live birth/ongoing pregnancy and miscarriage. We performed statistical analysis using Review Manager 5. We assessed evidence quality using GRADE methods.

MAIN RESULTS

We found 11 RCTs (1884 women) suitable for inclusion in the review. Most studies were at unclear or high risk of bias. The main limitations in the overall quality of the evidence were high risk of bias, unexplained heterogeneity and serious imprecision and indirectness.There were no data on our primary outcome - live birth per woman randomised - in any review comparisons.NSAIDs vs. placebo/no treatmentWe are uncertain of an effect on ongoing pregnancy when NSAIDs were compared to placebo/no treatment (risk ratio (RR) 1.06, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71 to 1.59; 4 studies, 1159 participants; I² = 53%; very low quality evidence). Results suggest that if the chance of ongoing pregnancy following placebo or no treatment is assumed to be 15%, the chance following the use of NSAIDs is estimated to be between 12% and 24%. Subgroup analysis according to the type of NSAID yielded similar results.We are also uncertain of an effect on miscarriage rates when NSAIDs were compared to placebo/no treatment (RR 0.62, 95% CI 0.33 to 1.16; 4 studies, 525 participants; I² = 43%; very low quality evidence). Results suggest that if the chance of miscarriage following placebo or no treatment is assumed to be 21%, the chance following the use of NSAIDs is estimated to be between 7% and 27%. The results were similar when two studies were excluded due to high risk of bias.Concerning the secondary outcomes, we are uncertain of an effect on clinical pregnancy rates (RR 1.23, 95% CI 1.00 to 1.52; 6 studies, 1570 participants; I² = 49%; low-quality evidence); on ectopic pregnancy (RR 0.56, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.89; 1 study, 72 participants); on multiple pregnancy (RR 2.00, 95% CI 0.18 to 21.67; 1 study, 180 participants); and on side effects (RR 1.39, 95% CI 0.02 to 119.35; 3 studies, 418 participants; I² = 79%). The evidence suggests that if the chance of clinical pregnancy following placebo or no treatment is assumed to be 30%, the chance following the use of NSAIDs is estimated to be between 31% and 45%. If the chance of ectopic pregnancy following placebo or no treatment is assumed to be 5%, the chance following the use of NSAIDs is estimated to be between 0.3% and 31%. If the chance of multiple pregnancy following placebo or no treatment is assumed to be 1%, the chance following the use of NSAIDs is estimated to be between 0.2 % and 24%.There were no cases of congenital anomalies during antenatal ultrasound screening of the women in one study.NSAID vs. another NSAIDOnly one study compared piroxicam with indomethacin: we are uncertain of an effect on ongoing pregnancy (RR 1.12, 95% CI 0.63 to 2.00; 1 study, 170 participants; very low quality evidence); and on miscarriage (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.44 to 2.28; 1 study, 170 participants; very low quality evidence). The evidence suggests that if the chance of ongoing pregnancy following indomethacin is assumed to be 20%, the chance following the use of piroxicam is estimated to be between 13% and 40%; while for miscarriage, the evidence suggests that if the chance following indomethacin is assumed to be 12%, the chance following the use of piroxicam is estimated to be between 5% and 27%.Similar results were reported for clinical pregnancy (RR 1.07, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.63; 1 study, 170 participants; very low quality evidence).There were no data for the other outcomes specified in this review.NSAID vs. aspirinNo study reported this comparison.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Currently we are uncertain of an effect of the routine use of NSAIDs as co-treatments in infertile women undergoing assisted reproduction in order to improve ongoing pregnancy and miscarriage rates. This is based on available data from RCTs, where very low quality evidence showed that there is no single outcome measure demonstrating a benefit with their use. Further large, well-designed randomised placebo-controlled trials reporting on live births are required to clarify the exact role of NSAIDs.

Delayed hemolysis, elevated liver enzymes, low platelet count syndrome in succession of switches of preventive anticoagulant treatment in a 41-year-old patient with a history of recurrent assisted implantation failures: a case report

Background

For the past decades the mean age of primiparae in Western societies is constantly increasing. At the same time, there is a growing demand for assisted reproductive technologies such as in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Subsequently, a higher prevalence of pregnancy-associated diseases such as gestational hypertension and preeclampsia is observed. To improve pregnancy rates after in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection and to reduce the risk of pregnancy-associated diseases with a cardiovascular pathophysiology, two anticoagulants are the focus of current research: low molecular weight heparin and acetylsalicylic acid (aspirin).

Case presentation

A 41-year-old white woman, gravida 3, para 0, received low molecular weight heparin to reduce the risk of abortion after five unsuccessful intracytoplasmic sperm injections and two miscarriages. She autonomously discontinued the medication with low molecular weight heparin at 12 weeks and 2 days of gestation and took aspirin instead until 24 weeks and 2 days of gestation as preeclampsia prophylaxis. However, the pregnancy ended with an urgent cesarean section at 27 weeks and 4 days of gestation due to a fast progressing hemolysis, elevated liver enzyme levels, and low blood platelet count syndrome, a potentially life-threatening variant of preeclampsia.

Conclusion

Based on the current demographic trend toward late-in-life pregnancy it is mandatory to establish clear guidelines concerning preventive treatment options of preeclampsia for patients with risk factors. The establishment of a special first-trimester screening for these women should be discussed. Moreover, it is necessary to raise the awareness among physicians of these contemporary issues to guarantee the best possible medical care.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13256-018-1943-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Intrauterine administration of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) for subfertile women undergoing assisted reproduction

BACKGROUND

Most women undergoing assisted reproduction treatment will reach the stage of embryo transfer (ET), but the proportion of embryos that can be successfully implanted after ET has remained small since the mid-1990s. Human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) is a hormone that is synthesised and released by the syncytiotrophoblast and has a fundamental role in embryo implantation and the early stages of pregnancy. Intrauterine administration of hCG via ET catheter during a mock procedure around the time of ET is a novel approach that has been suggested to improve the outcomes of assisted reproduction.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate whether intrauterine (intracavity) administration of hCG (IC-hCG) around the time of ET improves clinical outcomes in subfertile women undergoing assisted reproduction.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed searches on 9 January 2018 using Cochrane methods.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We looked for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating IC-hCG around the time of ET, irrespective of language and country of origin.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed risk of bias, extracted data from studies, and attempted to contact study authors when data were missing. We performed statistical analysis using Review Manager 5. We assessed evidence quality using GRADE methods. Primary outcomes were live birth and miscarriage; secondary outcomes were clinical pregnancy rate and complications.

MAIN RESULTS

Seventeen RCTs investigated the effects of IC-hCG administration for 4751 subfertile women undergoing assisted reproduction. IC-hCG was administered in variable doses at different times before the ET. hCG was obtained from the urine of pregnant women or from cell cultures using recombinant DNA technology.Most studies (12/17) were at high risk of bias in at least one of the seven domains assessed. Common problems were unclear reporting of study methods and lack of blinding. The main limitations for evidence quality were high risk of bias and serious imprecision.For analyses of live birth and clinical pregnancy, there was considerable heterogeneity (I² > 75%) and therefore we present subgroups for dosage and stage of ET. Exploration for sources of heterogeneity revealed two key prespecified variables as important determinants: stage of ET (cleavage vs blastocyst stage) and dose of IC-hCG (< 500 international units (IU) vs ≥ 500 IU). We performed meta-analyses within subgroups defined by stage of embryo and dose of IC-hCG.Live birth rates among women having cleavage-stage ET with an IC-hCG dose < 500 IU compared to women having cleavage-stage ET without IC-hCG showed no benefit of the intervention and would be consistent with no substantive difference or disadvantage of indeterminate magnitude (risk ratio (RR) 0.76, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.58 to 1.01; one RCT; 280 participants; I² = 0%; very low-quality evidence). In a clinic with a live birth rate of 49% per cycle, use of IC-hCG < 500 IU would be associated with a live birth rate ranging from 28% to 50%.Results show an increase in live birth rate in the subgroup of women undergoing cleavage-stage ET with an IC-hCG dose ≥ 500 IU compared to women having cleavage-stage ET without IC-hCG (RR 1.57, 95% CI 1.32 to 1.87; three RCTs; 914 participants; I² = 0%; moderate-quality evidence). At a clinic with a live birth rate of 27% per cycle, use of IC-hCG ≥ 500 IU would be associated with a live birth rate ranging from 36% to 51%.Results show no substantive differences in live birth among women having blastocyst-stage ET with an IC-hCG dose ≥ 500 IU compared to women having blastocyst-stage ET without IC-hCG (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.04; two RCTs; 1666 participants; I² = 0%; moderate-quality evidence). At a clinic with a live birth rate of 36% per cycle, use of IC-hCG ≥ 500 IU would be associated with a live birth rate ranging from 29% to 38%.Evidence for clinical pregnancy among women having cleavage-stage ET with an IC-hCG dose < 500 IU showed no benefit of the intervention and would be consistent with no substantive difference or disadvantage of indeterminate magnitude (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.10; one RCT; 280 participants; I² = 0%; very low-quality evidence).Results show an increase in clinical pregnancy rate in the subgroup of women having cleavage-stage ET with an IC-hCG dose ≥ 500 IU compared to women having cleavage-stage ET without IC-hCG (RR 1.49, 95% CI 1.32 to 1.68; 12 RCTs; 2186 participants; I² = 18%; moderate-quality evidence).Results show no substantive differences in clinical pregnancy among women having blastocyst-stage ET with an IC-hCG dose ≥ 500 IU (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.85 to 1.15; four RCTs; 2091 participants; I² = 42%; moderate-quality evidence) compared to women having blastocyst-stage ET with no IC-hCG.No RCTs investigated blastocyst-stage ET with an IC-hCG dose < 500 IU.We are uncertain whether miscarriage was influenced by intrauterine hCG administration (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.35; 11 RCTs; 3927 participants; I² = 0%; very low-quality evidence).Reported complications were ectopic pregnancy (four RCTs; 1073 participants; four events overall), heterotopic pregnancy (one RCT; 495 participants; one event), intrauterine death (three RCTs; 1078 participants; 22 events), and triplets (one RCT; 48 participants; three events). Events were few, and very low-quality evidence was insufficient to permit conclusions to be drawn.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is moderate quality evidence that women undergoing cleavage-stage transfer using an IC-hCG dose ≥ 500 IU have an improved live birth rate. There is insufficient evidence for IC-hCG treatment for blastocyst transfer. There should be further trials with live birth as the primary outcome to identify the groups of women who would benefit the most from this intervention. There was no evidence that miscarriage was reduced following IC-hCG administration, irrespective of embryo stage at transfer or dose of IC-hCG. Events were too few to allow conclusions to be drawn with regard to other complications.

Assisted reproductive technology: an overview of Cochrane Reviews

BACKGROUND

As many as one in six couples will encounter problems with fertility, defined as failure to achieve a clinical pregnancy after regular intercourse for 12 months. Increasingly, couples are turning to assisted reproductive technology (ART) for help with conceiving and ultimately giving birth to a healthy live baby of their own. Fertility treatments are complex, and each ART cycle consists of several steps. If one of these steps is incorrectly applied, the stakes are high as conception may not occur. With this in mind, it is important that each step of the ART cycle is supported by good evidence from well-designed studies.

OBJECTIVES

To summarise the evidence from Cochrane systematic reviews on procedures and treatment options available to couples with subfertility undergoing assisted reproductive technology (ART) procedures.

METHODS

Published Cochrane systematic reviews of couples undergoing ART procedures (in vitro fertilisation or intracytoplasmic sperm injection) were eligible for inclusion in the overview. We also identified Cochrane reviews in preparation, for future inclusion.The primary outcome of the overview was live birth or the composite outcome live birth or ongoing pregnancy, as reported by the included reviews. Our secondary outcomes were clinical pregnancy, multiple pregnancy, miscarriage, and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. We excluded studies of intrauterine insemination and ovulation induction.We undertook selection of systematic reviews, data extraction, and quality assessment in duplicate. We assessed review quality by using the AMSTAR tool. We organised reviews by their relevance to specific stages in the ART cycle. We summarised their findings in the text and reported data for each outcome in 'Additional tables'.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 68 systematic reviews published in the Cochrane Library up to May 2018. All were of high quality. These reviews identified 38 interventions that were effective (n = 23) or promising (n = 15), and they identified 19 interventions that were ineffective (n = 2) or possibly ineffective (n = 17). For 15 interventions, review authors were unable to draw conclusions owing to lack of evidence.We identified an additional 11 protocols and four titles for future inclusion in this overview.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This overview provides the most up-to-date evidence on ART cycles from systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials. Fertility treatments are costly, and the stakes are high. Using the best available evidence to optimise outcomes is best practice. Evidence from this overview could be used to develop clinical practice guidelines and protocols that can be applied in daily clinical practice to improve live birth rates and reduce rates of multiple pregnancy, cycle cancellation, and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome.

Efficacy of low-molecular-weight heparin on the outcomes of in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection pregnancy in non-thrombophilic women: a meta-analysis

Introduction

The aim of our study was to evaluate the effect of low‐molecular‐weight heparin on pregnancy outcomes in women without thrombophilia during in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection treatment.

Material and methods

We searched Pubmed, Web of Science, Embase, Cochrane and CNKI (from inception to 2 February 2018). Our study identified randomized controlled trials or quasi‐randomized controlled trials comparing low‐molecular‐weight heparin subcutaneous treatment with no treatment or only luteal support control. The outcomes included live birth rate, clinical pregnancy rate and miscarriage rate.

Results

Five trials, including 935 women receiving in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection treatment, were included in meta‐analyses. There were 458 women receiving low‐molecular‐weight heparin and 477 in the control group. No significant differences for live birth rate, clinical pregnancy rate and miscarriage rate were found between the low‐molecular‐weight heparin and control groups. Of them, four trials reported live birth rate as an outcome and the risk ratio was 1.13 (95% confidence interval 0.88–1.43, p = 0.34). All five trials reported clinical pregnancy rate as an outcome, the risk ratio was 1.08 (95% confidence interval 0.87–1.32, p = 0.47). Three trials reported miscarriage rate and the risk ratio was 0.58 (95% confidence interval 0.30–1.10, p = 0.09). In women with two or more failed in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles, the risk ratio of live birth rate was 1.15 and the risk ratio of clinical pregnancy rate was 1.17. In women with three or more failed in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles, the risk ratios of live birth rate and clinical pregnancy rate were 1.36 and 1.35, respectively.

Conclusions

Our results suggested that low‐molecular‐weight heparin had no effect on pregnancy success rate in non‐thrombophilic women undergoing in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection treatment. However, to justify the use of low‐molecular‐weight heparin in clinical practice, multicenter trials are still necessary.

Impact of blood hypercoagulability on in vitro fertilization outcomes: a prospective longitudinal observational study

Background

Blood coagulation plays a crucial role in the blastocyst implantation process and its alteration may be related to in vitro fertilization (IVF) failure. We conducted a prospective observational longitudinal study in women eligible for IVF to explore the association between alterations of coagulation with the IVF outcome and to identify the biomarkers of hypercoagulability which are related with this outcome.

Methods

Thirty-eight women eligible for IVF (IVF-group) and 30 healthy, age-matched women (control group) were included. In the IVF-group, blood was collected at baseline, 5–8 days after administration of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH), before and two weeks after administration of human follicular stimulating hormone (FSH). Pregnancy was monitored by measurement of βHCG performed 15 days after embryo transfer. Thrombin generation (TG), minimal tissue factor-triggered whole blood thromboelastometry (ROTEM®), procoagulant phospholipid clotting time (Procoag-PPL®), thrombomodulin (TMa), tissue factor activity (TFa), factor VIII (FVIII), factor von Willebrand (FvW), D-Dimers and fibrinogen were assessed at each time point.

Results

Positive IVF occurred in 15 women (40%). At baseline, the IVF-group showed significantly increased TG, TFa and TMa and significantly shorter Procoag-PPL versus the control group. After initiation of hormone treatment TG was significantly higher in the IVF-positive as compared to the IVF-negative group. At all studied points, the Procoag-PPL was significantly shorter and the levels of TFa were significantly higher in the IVF-negative group compared to the IVF-positive one. The D-Dimers were higher in the IVF negative as compared to IVF positive group. Multivariate analysis retained the Procoag-PPL and TG as predictors for the IVF outcome.

Conclusions

Diagnosis of women with hypercoagulability and their stratification to risk of IVF failure using a model based on the Procoag-PPL and TG is a feasible strategy for the optimization of IVF efficiency that needs to be validated in prospective trials.

Interventions for the prevention of OHSS in ART cycles: an overview of Cochrane reviews

BACKGROUND

Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) in assisted reproductive technology (ART) cycles is a treatment-induced disease that has an estimated prevalence of 20% to 33% in its mild form and 3% to 8% in its moderate or severe form. These numbers might even be higher for high-risk women such as those with polycystic ovaries or a high oocyte yield from ovum pickup.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this overview is to identify and summarise all evidence from Cochrane systematic reviews on interventions for prevention or treatment of moderate, severe and overall OHSS in couples with subfertility who are undergoing ART cycles.

METHODS

Published Cochrane systematic reviews reporting on moderate, severe or overall OHSS as an outcome in ART cycles were eligible for inclusion in this overview. We also identified Cochrane submitted protocols and title registrations for future inclusion in the overview. The evidence is current to 12 December 2016. We identified reviews, protocols and titles by searching the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Database of Systematic Reviews and Archie (the Cochrane information management system) in July 2016 on the effectiveness of interventions for outcomes of moderate, severe and overall OHSS. We undertook in duplicate selection of systematic reviews, data extraction and quality assessment. We used the AMSTAR (Assessing the Methodological Quality of Systematic Reviews) tool to assess the quality of included reviews, and we used GRADE methods to assess the quality of the evidence for each outcome. We summarised the characteristics of included reviews in the text and in additional tables.

MAIN RESULTS

We included a total of 27 reviews in this overview. The reviews were generally of high quality according to AMSTAR ratings, and included studies provided evidence that ranged from very low to high in quality. Ten reviews had not been updated in the past three years. Seven reviews described interventions that provided a beneficial effect in reducing OHSS rates, and we categorised one additional review as 'promising'. Of the effective interventions, all except one had no detrimental effect on pregnancy outcomes. Evidence of at least moderate quality indicates that clinicians should consider the following interventions in ART cycles to reduce OHSS rates.• Metformin treatment before and during an ART cycle for women with PCOS (moderate-quality evidence).• Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol in ART cycles (moderate-quality evidence).• GnRH agonist (GnRHa) trigger in donor oocyte or 'freeze-all' programmes (moderate-quality evidence). Evidence of low or very low quality suggests that clinicians should consider the following interventions in ART cycles to reduce OHSS rates.• Clomiphene citrate for controlled ovarian stimulation in ART cycles (low-quality evidence).• Cabergoline around the time of human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG) administration or oocyte pickup in ART cycles (low-quality evidence).• Intravenous fluids (plasma expanders) around the time of hCG administration or oocyte pickup in ART cycles (very low-quality evidence).• Progesterone for luteal phase support in ART cycles (low-quality evidence).• Coasting (withholding gonadotrophins) - a promising intervention that needs to be researched further for reduction of OHSS.On the basis of this overview, we must conclude that evidence is currently insufficient to support the widespread practice of embryo cryopreservation.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Currently, 27 reviews in the Cochrane Library were conducted to report on or to try to report on OHSS in ART cycles. We identified four review protocols but no new registered titles that can potentially be included in this overview in the future. This overview provides the most up-to-date evidence on prevention of OHSS in ART cycles from all currently published Cochrane reviews on ART. Clinicians can use the evidence summarised in this overview to choose the best treatment regimen for individual patients - a regimen that not only reduces the chance of developing OHSS but does not compromise other outcomes such as pregnancy or live birth rate. Review results, however, are limited by the lack of recent primary studies or updated reviews. Furthermore, this overview can be used by policymakers in developing local and regional protocols or guidelines and can reveal knowledge gaps for future research.

Intrauterine administration of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) for subfertile women undergoing assisted reproduction

BACKGROUND

Subfertility affects 15% of couples and represents the inability to conceive naturally following 12 months of regular unprotected sexual intercourse. Assisted reproduction refers to procedures involving the in vitro handling of both human gametes and represents a key option for many subfertile couples. Most women undergoing assisted reproduction treatment will reach the stage of embryo transfer (ET) but the proportion of embryos that successfully implant following ET has remained small since the mid-1990s. Human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) is a hormone synthesised and released by the syncytiotrophoblast and has a fundamental role in embryo implantation and the early stages of pregnancy. Intrauterine administration of synthetic or natural hCG via an ET catheter during a mock procedure around the time of ET is a novel approach that has recently been suggested to improve the outcomes of assisted reproduction.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate whether the intrauterine administration of hCG around the time of ET improves the clinical outcomes in subfertile women undergoing assisted reproduction.

SEARCH METHODS

We performed a comprehensive literature search of the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, registers of ongoing trials andreference lists of all included studies and relevant reviews (from inception to 10 November 2015), in consultation with the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Trials Search Co-ordinator.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating intrauterine administration of hCG around the time of ET in this review irrespective of language and country of origin.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently selected studies, assessed risk of bias, extracted data from studies and attempted to contact the authors where data were missing. We performed statistical analysis using Review Manager 5 in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. We assessed evidence quality using GRADE methods.

MAIN RESULTS

Twelve RCTs investigated the effect of intrauterine administration of hCG for 4038 subfertile women undergoing assisted reproduction. The intra-cavity hCG (IC-hCG) was administered in variable doses at different timings before the ET. The source of hCG was from the urine of pregnant women or from cell cultures using recombinant DNA technology.Most of the studies (9/12) were at high risk of bias in at least one of the seven domains assessed. Common problems were unclear reporting of study methods and lack of blinding. The main limitations in the overall quality of the evidence were high risk of bias and serious imprecision.For the analyses of live birth and clinical pregnancy, there was considerable heterogeneity (I(2) greater than 75%) and we did not undertake a meta-analysis. Exploration for the sources of heterogeneity identified two key pre-specified variables as important determinants: stage of ET (cleavage versus blastocyst stage) and dose of IC-hCG (less than 500 international units (IU) versus 500 IU or greater). We then performed meta-analysis for these analyses within the subgroups defined by stage of embryo and dose of IC-hCG.There was an increase in live birth rate in the subgroup of women having cleavage-stage ETs with an IC-hCG dose of 500 IU or greater compared to women having cleavage-stage ETs with no IC-hCG (risk ratio (RR) 1.57, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.32 to 1.87, three RCTs, n = 914, I(2) = 0%, moderate quality evidence). In a clinic with a live birth rate of 25% per cycle then the use of IC-hCG -500 IU or greater would be associated with a live birth rate that varies from 33% to 46%. We did not observe a significant effect on live birth in any of the other subgroups.The was an increase in clinical pregnancy rate in the subgroup of women having cleavage-stage ETs with an IC-hCG dose of 500 IU or greater compared to women having cleavage-stage ETs with no IC-hCG (RR 1.41, 95% CI 1.25 to 1.58, seven RCTs, n = 1414, I(2) = 0%, moderate quality evidence). We did not observe a significant effect on clinical pregnancy in either of the other subgroups.There was no evidence that miscarriage was influenced by intrauterine hCG administration (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.43, seven RCTs, n = 3395, I(2) = 0%, very low quality evidence).Other complications reported in the included studies were ectopic pregnancy (three RCTs, n = 915, three events overall), heterotopic pregnancy (one RCT, n = 495, one event), intrauterine death (two RCTs, n = 978, 21 events) and triplets (one RCT, n = 48, three events). There was no evidence of a difference between the groups, but there were too few events to allow any conclusions to be drawn and the evidence was very low quality.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The pregnancy outcome for cleavage-stage ETs using an IC-hCG dose of 500 IU or greater is promising. However, given the small size and the variable quality of the trials and the fact that the positive finding was from a subgroup analysis, the current evidence for IC-hCG treatment does not support its use in assisted reproduction cycles. A definitive large clinical trial with live birth as the primary outcome is recommended. There was no evidence that miscarriage was influenced by intrauterine hCG administration, irrespective of embryo stage at transfer or dose of IC-hCG. There were too few events to allow any conclusions to be drawn with regard to other complications.

Androgens (dehydroepiandrosterone or testosterone) for women undergoing assisted reproduction

BACKGROUND

Infertility is a condition affecting 10% to 15% of couples of reproductive age. It is generally defined as "the failure to achieve a clinical pregnancy after 12 months or more of regular unprotected sexual intercourse". The treatment of infertility may involve manipulation of gametes or of the embryos themselves. These techniques are together known as assisted reproductive technology (ART). Practitioners are constantly seeking alternative or adjunct treatments, or both, in the hope that they may improve the outcome of assisted reproductive techniques. This Cochrane review focusses on the adjunct use of synthetic versions of two naturally-produced hormones, dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) and testosterone (T), in assisted reproduction.DHEA and its derivative testosterone are steroid hormones proposed to increase conception rates by positively affecting follicular response to gonadotrophin stimulation, leading to greater oocyte yields and, in turn, increased chance of pregnancy.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and safety of DHEA and testosterone as pre- or co-treatments in subfertile women undergoing assisted reproduction.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic databases, trial registers and websites up to 12 March 2015: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group (MDSG) Specialised Register, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, electronic trial registers for ongoing and registered trials, citation indexes, conference abstracts in the Web of Science, PubMed and OpenSIGLE. We also carried out handsearches. There were no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing DHEA or testosterone as an adjunct treatment to any other active intervention, placebo, or no treatment in women undergoing assisted reproduction.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies, extracted relevant data and assessed them for risk of bias. We pooled studies using fixed-effect models. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) for each dichotomous outcome. Analyses were stratified by type of treatment. There were no data for the intended groupings by dose, mode of delivery or after one/more than one cycle.We assessed the overall quality of the evidence for the main findings using the GRADE working group methods.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 17 RCTs with a total of 1496 participants. Apart from two trials, the trial participants were women identified as 'poor responders' to standard IVF protocols. The included trials compared either testosterone or DHEA treatment with placebo or no treatment.When DHEA was compared with placebo or no treatment, pre-treatment with DHEA was associated with higher rates of live birth or ongoing pregnancy (OR 1.88, 95% CI 1.30 to 2.71; eight RCTs, N = 878, I² statistic = 27%, moderate quality evidence). This suggests that in women with a 12% chance of live birth/ongoing pregnancy with placebo or no treatment, the live birth/ongoing pregnancy rate in women using DHEA will be between 15% and 26%. However, in a sensitivity analysis removing trials at high risk of performance bias, the effect size was reduced and no longer reached significance (OR 1.50, 95% CI 0.88 to 2.56; five RCTs, N = 306, I² statistic = 43%). There was no evidence of a difference in miscarriage rates (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.29 to 1.17; eight RCTs, N = 950, I² statistic = 0%, moderate quality evidence). Multiple pregnancy data were available for five trials, with one multiple pregnancy in the DHEA group of one trial (OR 3.23, 95% CI 0.13 to 81.01; five RCTs, N = 267, very low quality evidence).When testosterone was compared with placebo or no treatment we found that pre-treatment with testosterone was associated with higher live birth rates (OR 2.60, 95% CI 1.30 to 5.20; four RCTs, N = 345, I² statistic = 0%, moderate evidence). This suggests that in women with an 8% chance of live birth with placebo or no treatment, the live birth rate in women using testosterone will be between 10% and 32%. On removal of studies at high risk of performance bias in a sensitivity analysis, the remaining study showed no evidence of a difference between the groups (OR 2.00, 95% CI 0.17 to 23.49; one RCT, N = 53). There was no evidence of a difference in miscarriage rates (OR 2.04, 95% CI 0.58 to 7.13; four RCTs, N = 345, I² = 0%, low quality evidence). Multiple pregnancy data were available for three trials, with four events in the testosterone group and one in the placebo/no treatment group (OR 3.09, 95% CI 0.48 to 19.98; three RCTs, N = 292, very low quality evidence).One study compared testosterone with estradiol and reported no evidence of a difference in live birth rates (OR 2.06, 95% CI 0.43 to 9.87; one RCT, N = 46, very low quality evidence) or miscarriage rates (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.11 to 4.64; one RCT, N = 46, very low quality evidence).The quality of the evidence was moderate, the main limitations being lack of blinding in the included trials, inadequate reporting of study methods, and low event and sample sizes in some trials.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

In women identified as poor responders undergoing ART, pre-treatment with DHEA or testosterone may be associated with improved live birth rates. The overall quality of the evidence is moderate. There is insufficient evidence to draw any conclusions about the safety of either androgen. Definitive conclusions regarding the clinical role of either androgen awaits evidence from further well-designed studies.

Assisted reproductive technology: an overview of Cochrane Reviews

BACKGROUND

As many as one in six couples will encounter problems with fertility, defined as failure to achieve a clinical pregnancy after regular intercourse for 12 months. Increasingly, couples are turning to assisted reproductive technology (ART) for help with conceiving and ultimately giving birth to a healthy live baby of their own. Fertility treatments are complex, and each ART cycle consists of several steps. If one of the steps is incorrectly applied, the stakes are high as conception may not occur. With this in mind, it is important that each step of the ART cycle is supported by good evidence from well-designed studies.

OBJECTIVES

To summarise the evidence from Cochrane systematic reviews on procedures and treatment options available to couples with subfertility undergoing assisted reproductive technology (ART).

METHODS

Published Cochrane systematic reviews of couples undergoing ART (in vitro fertilisation or intracytoplasmic sperm injection) were eligible for inclusion in the overview. We also identified Cochrane reviews in preparation, for future inclusion.The outcomes of the overview were live birth (primary outcome), clinical pregnancy, multiple pregnancy, miscarriage and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (secondary outcomes). Studies of intrauterine insemination and ovulation induction were excluded.Selection of systematic reviews, data extraction and quality assessment were undertaken in duplicate. Review quality was assessed by using the AMSTAR tool. Reviews were organised by their relevance to specific stages in the ART cycle. Their findings were summarised in the text and data for each outcome were reported in 'Additional tables'.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-nine systematic reviews published in The Cochrane Library up to July 2015 were included. All were high quality. Thirty-two reviews identified interventions that were effective (n = 19) or promising (n = 13), 14 reviews identified interventions that were either ineffective (n = 2) or possibly ineffective (n = 12), and 13 reviews were unable to draw conclusions due to lack of evidence.An additional 11 protocols and five titles were identified for future inclusion in this overview.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This overview provides the most up to date evidence on ART cycles from systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials. Fertility treatments are costly and the stakes are high. Using the best available evidence to optimise outcomes is best practice. The evidence from this overview could be used to develop clinical practice guidelines and protocols for use in daily clinical practice, in order to improve live birth rates and reduce rates of multiple pregnancy, cycle cancellation and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome.

Assisted reproductive technology: an overview of Cochrane reviews

BACKGROUND

As many as one in six couples will encounter problems with fertility, defined as failure to achieve a clinical pregnancy after regular intercourse for 12 months. Increasingly, couples are turning to assisted reproductive technology (ART) for help with conceiving and ultimately giving birth to a healthy live baby of their own. Fertility treatments are complex, and each ART cycle consists of several steps. If one of the steps is incorrectly applied, the stakes are high as conception may not occur. With this in mind, it is important that each step of the ART cycle is supported by good evidence from well-designed studies.

OBJECTIVES

To summarise the evidence from Cochrane systematic reviews on procedures and treatment options available to couples with subfertility undergoing assisted reproductive technology (ART).

METHODS

Published Cochrane systematic reviews of couples undergoing ART (in vitro fertilisation or intracytoplasmic sperm injection) were eligible for inclusion in the overview. We also identified Cochrane reviews in preparation, for future inclusion.The outcomes of the overview were live birth (primary outcome), clinical pregnancy, multiple pregnancy, miscarriage and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (secondary outcomes). Studies of intrauterine insemination and ovulation induction were excluded.Selection of systematic reviews, data extraction and quality assessment were undertaken in duplicate. Review quality was assessed by using the AMSTAR tool. Reviews were organised by their relevance to specific stages in the ART cycle. Their findings were summarised in the text and data for each outcome were reported in 'Additional tables'.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-eight systematic reviews published in The Cochrane Library were included. All were high quality. Thirty-two reviews identified interventions that were effective (n = 19) or promising (n = 13), 14 reviews identified interventions that were either ineffective (n = 3) or possibly ineffective (n=11), and 12 reviews were unable to draw conclusions due to lack of evidence.An additional 11 protocols and one title were identified for future inclusion in this overview.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This overview provides the most up to date evidence on ART cycles from systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials. Fertility treatments are costly and the stakes are high. Using the best available evidence to optimise outcomes is best practice. The evidence from this overview could be used to develop clinical practice guidelines and protocols for use in daily clinical practice, in order to improve live birth rates and reduce rates of multiple pregnancy, cycle cancellation and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome.

Assisted reproductive technology: an overview of Cochrane Reviews

BACKGROUND

As many as one in six couples will encounter problems with fertility, defined as failure to achieve a clinical pregnancy after regular intercourse for 12 months. Increasingly, couples are turning to assisted reproductive technology (ART) for help with conceiving and ultimately giving birth to a healthy live baby of their own. Fertility treatments are complex, and each ART cycle consists of several steps. If one of the steps is incorrectly applied, the stakes are high as conception may not occur. With this in mind, it is important that each step of the ART cycle is supported by good evidence from well-designed studies.

OBJECTIVES

To summarise the evidence from Cochrane systematic reviews on procedures and treatment options available to couples with subfertility undergoing assisted reproductive technology (ART).

METHODS

Published Cochrane systematic reviews of couples undergoing ART (in vitro fertilisation or intracytoplasmic sperm injection) were eligible for inclusion in the overview. We also identified Cochrane reviews in preparation, for future inclusion.The outcomes of the overview were live birth (primary outcome), clinical pregnancy, multiple pregnancy, miscarriage and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (secondary outcomes). Studies of intrauterine insemination and ovulation induction were excluded.Selection of systematic reviews, data extraction and quality assessment were undertaken in duplicate. Review quality was assessed by using the AMSTAR tool. Reviews were organised by their relevance to specific stages in the ART cycle. Their findings were summarised in the text and data for each outcome were reported in 'Additional tables'.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-four systematic reviews published in The Cochrane Library were included. All were high quality. Thirty reviews identified interventions that were effective (n = 18) or promising (n = 12), 13 reviews identified interventions that were either ineffective (n = 3) or possibly ineffective (n=10), and 11 reviews were unable to draw conclusions due to lack of evidence.An additional 15 protocols and two titles were identified for future inclusion in this overview.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This overview provides the most up to date evidence on ART cycles from systematic reviews of randomised controlled trials. Fertility treatments are costly and the stakes are high. Using the best available evidence to optimise outcomes is best practice. The evidence from this overview could be used to develop clinical practice guidelines and protocols for use in daily clinical practice, in order to improve live birth rates and reduce rates of multiple pregnancy, cycle cancellation and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome.