1
|
Perrotta M, Zampino L, Geampana A, Bhide P. Analysing adherence to guidelines for time-lapse imaging information on UK fertility clinic websites. HUM FERTIL 2024; 27:2346595. [PMID: 38769878 DOI: 10.1080/14647273.2024.2346595] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 12/11/2023] [Accepted: 04/12/2024] [Indexed: 05/22/2024]
Abstract
This study aims to systematically analyze the provision of information on Time-lapse Imaging (TLI) by UK fertility clinic websites. We conducted an analysis of 106 clinic websites that offer fertility treatment to self-funded patients. The analysis aimed to examine whether these clinics offer TLI, the associated cost for patients, and the clarity and quality of the provided information. Out of the 106 websites analysed, 71 (67%) claimed to offer TLI. Among these websites, 25 (35.2%) mentioned charging patients between £300 and £850, 25 (35.8%) claimed not to charge patients, and 21 (29.6%) did not provide any cost information for TLI. Furthermore, 64 (90.1%) websites made claims or implied that TLI leads to improved clinical outcomes by enhancing embryo selection. Notably, 34 (47.9%) websites did not mention or provide any links to the HFEA rating system. It is crucial to provide patients with clear and accurate information to enable them to make fully informed decisions about TLI, particularly when they are responsible for the associated costs. The findings of this study raise concerns about the reliability and accuracy of the information available on fertility clinic websites, which are typically the primary source of information for patients.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Manuela Perrotta
- Department of People and Organisation, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| | - Letizia Zampino
- Department of People and Organisation, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
- Department of Social Sciences and Economics, University of Rome "La Sapienza", Rome, Italy
| | | | - Priya Bhide
- Wolfson Institute of Population Health, Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Palomba S, Carone D, Vitagliano A, Costanzi F, Fracassi A, Russo T, Del Negro S, Biello A, Di Filippo A, Mangiacasale A, Monaco A, Ranieri A, Ermini B, Barba BF, Castello C, Di Guardo F, Pastorella F, Bernasconi E, Tricarico EM, Filippi F, Polsinelli F, Monte GL, Sosa Fernandez LM, Galletta M, Giardina P, Totaro P, Laganara R, Liguori R, Buccheri M, Montanino Oliva M, Piscopo R, Iuliano A, Innantuoni N, Romanello I, Sinatra F, Liprino A, Thiella R, Tiezzi A, Bartolotti T, Tomasi A, Finocchiaro V, Thiella M, Fuggetta G, Messineo S, Isabella F, Tripodi M, Iaccarino S, La Sala GB, Papaleo E, Caserta D, Marci R, Somigliana E, Guglielmino A. Fertility specialists' views, behavior, and attitudes towards the use of endometrial scratching in Italy. BMC Womens Health 2023; 23:397. [PMID: 37516869 PMCID: PMC10386779 DOI: 10.1186/s12905-023-02564-0] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 08/25/2022] [Accepted: 07/22/2023] [Indexed: 07/31/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Endometrial scratching (ES) or injury is intentional damage to the endometrium performed to improve reproductive outcomes for infertile women desiring pregnancy. Moreover, recent systematic reviews with meta-analyses and randomized controlled trials demonstrated that ES is not effective, data on the safety are limited, and it should not be recommended in clinical practice. The aim of the current study was to assess the view and behavior towards ES among fertility specialists throughout infertility centers in Italy, and the relationship between these views and the attitudes towards the use of ES as an add-on in their commercial setting. METHODS Online survey among infertility centers, affiliated to Italian Society of Human Reproduction (SIRU), was performed using a detailed questionnaire including 45 questions with the possibility to give "closed" multi-choice answers for 41 items and "open" answers for 4 items. Online data from the websites of the infertility centers resulting in affiliation with the specialists were also recorded and analyzed. The quality of information about ES given on infertility centers websites was assessed using a scoring matrix including 10 specific questions (scored from 0 to 2 points), and the possible scores ranged from 0 to 13 points ('excellent' if the score was 9 points or more, 'moderate' if the score was between 5 and 8, and 'poor' if it was 4 points or less). RESULTS The response rate was of 60.6% (43 questionnaires / 71 infertility SIRU-affiliated centers). All included questionnaires were completed in their entirety. Most physicians (~ 70%) reported to offer ES to less than 10% of their patients. The procedure is mainly performed in the secretory phase (69.2%) using pipelle (61.5%), and usually in medical ambulatory (56.4%) before IVF cycles to improve implantation (71.8%) without drugs administration (e.g., pain drugs, antibiotics, anti-hemorrhagics, or others) before (76.8%) or after (64.1%) the procedure. Only a little proportion of infertility centers included in the analysis proposes formally the ES as an add-on procedure (9.3%), even if, when proposed, the full description of the indications, efficacy, safety, and costs is never addressed. However, the overall information quality of the websites was generally "poor" ranging from 3 to 8 and having a low total score (4.7 ± 1.6; mean ± standard deviation). CONCLUSIONS In Italy, ES is a procedure still performed among fertility specialists for improving the implantation rate in IVF patients. Moreover, they have a poor attitude in proposing ES as an add-on in the commercial setting.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Stefano Palomba
- Sant'Andrea Hospital, University "Sapienza" of Rome, Rome, Italy.
| | | | | | - Flavia Costanzi
- Sant'Andrea Hospital, University "Sapienza" of Rome, Rome, Italy
| | | | - Tiziana Russo
- Grande Ospedale Metropolitano, Reggio Calabria, Italy
- Gatjc Fertility Center, Gioia Tauro, Reggio Calabria, Italy
| | - Serena Del Negro
- Gatjc Fertility Center, Gioia Tauro, Reggio Calabria, Italy
- Presidio Ospedaliero Di Soverato "Basso Ionio", Soverato, Catanzaro, Italy
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Beatrice Ermini
- Centro Italiano Di Procreazione Assistita - CIPA, Rome, Italy
| | | | - Claudio Castello
- Centro FIVET Città Di Torino, Casa Della Salute Valdese, Turin, Italy
| | - Federica Di Guardo
- Azienda Ospedaliero Universitaria Policlinico "G. Rodolico - San Marco", Catania, Italy
| | | | | | | | - Francesca Filippi
- Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Grande - Ospedale Maggiore - University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | | | - Giuseppe Lo Monte
- Centro Di Medicina Della Riproduzione E Crioconservazione Dei Gameti, Ospedale Di Brunico, Bolzano, Italy
| | | | - Marco Galletta
- Centro Di Procreazione Medicalmente Assistita, Azienda Ospedaliera "Papardo", Messina, Italy
| | | | - Pasquale Totaro
- Centro Di Procreazione Medicalmente Assistita, Ospedale Santa Maria, Bari, Italy
| | | | | | | | | | | | - Assunta Iuliano
- UOC Di Ostetricia E Ginecologia, Azienda Ospedaliera "San Carlo", Potenza, Italy
| | | | - Irene Romanello
- SSD Di Procreazione Medicalmente Assistita, Azienza Sanitaria Friuli Occidentale, Sacile, Pordenone, Italy
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Giuseppa Fuggetta
- SSD Di Procreazione Medicalmente Assistita, Azienza Sanitaria Friuli Occidentale, Sacile, Pordenone, Italy
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | - Edgardo Somigliana
- Fondazione IRCCS Ca' Grande - Ospedale Maggiore - University of Milan, Milan, Italy
| | | |
Collapse
|
4
|
Tocci A, Barad D, Łukaszuk K, Orvieto R. Routine double-ovarian-stimulation (DuoStim) in poor responders lacks rationale, evidence, and follow-up. Hum Reprod 2023; 38:329-333. [PMID: 36692185 DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dead002] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/24/2022] [Revised: 12/22/2022] [Indexed: 01/25/2023] Open
Abstract
Double ovarian stimulation (DuoStim), initially only suggested for fertility preservation in cancer patients, is now increasingly also used in routine clinical IVF, especially in poor responders. The claimed rational for this is the alleged existence of multiple follicular waves in a single intermenstrual interval, allowing for retrieval of more oocytes in a single IVF cycle. This commentary argues that this expansion of purpose lacks rationale, evidence, and follow-up. Consequently, we suggest that, unless valid clinical indications have been established, DuoStim be only subject of controlled clinical trials with appropriate experimental consents.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Angelo Tocci
- Reproductive Medicine Unit, Gruppo Donnamed, Rome, Italy
| | - David Barad
- Center for Human Reproduction, New York, NY, USA.,The Foundation for Reproductive Medicine, New York, NY, USA
| | - Krzysztof Łukaszuk
- INVICTA Fertility and Reproductive Centers, Gdańsk, Poland.,Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecological Nursing, Faculty of Health Sciences, Medical University of Gdańsk, Gdańsk, Poland.,iYoni App-For Fertility Treatment, LifeBite, Olsztyn, Poland
| | - Raoul Orvieto
- Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Chaim Sheba Medical Center (Tel Hashomer), Ramat Gan, Israel.,Sackler Faculty of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel
| | | |
Collapse
|
5
|
Tyler B, Walford H, Tamblyn J, Keay SD, Mavrelos D, Yasmin E, Al Wattar BH. Interventions to optimize embryo transfer in women undergoing assisted conception: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analyses. Hum Reprod Update 2022; 28:480-500. [PMID: 35325124 PMCID: PMC9631462 DOI: 10.1093/humupd/dmac009] [Citation(s) in RCA: 16] [Impact Index Per Article: 8.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 10/15/2021] [Revised: 02/02/2022] [Indexed: 12/14/2022] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND Several interventions and techniques are suggested to improve the outcome of embryo transfer (ET) in assisted conception. However, there remains no consensus on the optimal practice, with high variations among fertility specialists. OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE We conducted a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) aiming to identify effective interventions that could be introduced around the time of ET to improve reproductive outcomes. SEARCH METHODS We searched the electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane CENTRAL) from inception until March 2021 using a multi-stage search strategy of MeSH terms and keywords, and included all RCTs that evaluated an intervention in the 24-h period before/after ET in women undergoing IVF/ICSI. Our primary outcome was clinical pregnancy rate post-ET confirmed as viable pregnancy on ultrasound scan. We assessed the risk of bias in included trials and extracted data in duplicate. We pooled data using a random-effect meta-analysis and reported using risk ratio (RR) with 95% CI. We explored publication bias and effect modifiers using subgroup analyses. OUTCOMES Our search yielded 3685 citations of which we included 188 RCTs (38 interventions, 59 530 participants) with a median sample size of 200 (range 26-1761). The quality of included RCTs was moderate with most showing a low risk of bias for randomization (118/188, 62.8%) and attrition (105/188, 55.8%) but there was a significant risk of publication bias (Egger's test P = 0.001). Performing ET with ultrasound guidance versus clinical touch (n = 24, RR 1.265, 95% CI 1.151-1.391, I2 = 38.53%), hyaluronic acid versus routine care (n = 9, RR 1.457, 95% CI 1.197-1.261, I2 = 46.48%) and the use of a soft versus hard catheter (n = 27, RR 1.122, 95% CI 1.028-1.224, I2 = 57.66%) led to higher clinical pregnancy rates. Other pharmacological add-ons also showed a beneficial effect including granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF: n = 4, RR 1.774, 95% CI 1.252-2.512, I2 = 0), Atosiban (n = 7, RR 1.493, 95% CI 1.184-1.882, I2 = 68.27%) and hCG (n = 17, RR 1.232, 95% CI 1.099-1.382, I2 = 57.76%). Bed rest following ET was associated with a reduction in clinical pregnancy (n = 6, RR 0.857, 95% CI 0.741-0.991, I2 = 0.01%). Other commonly used interventions, such as non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, prophylactic antibiotics, acupuncture and cervical mucus removal, did not show a significant benefit on reproductive outcomes. Our effect estimates for other important outcomes, including miscarriage and live birth, were limited by the varied reporting across included RCTs. WIDER IMPLICATIONS Using ultrasound guidance, soft catheters and hyaluronic acid at the time of ET appears to increase clinical pregnancy rates. The use of Atosiban, G-CSF and hCG showed a trend towards increased clinical pregnancy rate, but larger trials are required before adopting these interventions in clinical practice. Bed rest post-ET was associated with a reduction in clinical pregnancy and should not be recommended.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Bede Tyler
- UCL Institute for Women's Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Hugo Walford
- UCL Institute for Women's Health, University College London, London, UK
| | - Jennifer Tamblyn
- Institute of Metabolism and Systems Research (IMSR), University of Birmingham, Birmingham, UK
| | - Stephen D Keay
- Centre for Reproductive Medicine, University Hospital of Coventry & Warwickshire, Coventry, UK
| | - Dimitrios Mavrelos
- UCL Institute for Women's Health, University College London, London, UK,Reproductive Medicine Unit, Elizabeth Garrett Anderson Wing, University College London Hospitals, London, UK
| | - Ephia Yasmin
- UCL Institute for Women's Health, University College London, London, UK,Reproductive Medicine Unit, Elizabeth Garrett Anderson Wing, University College London Hospitals, London, UK
| | - Bassel H Al Wattar
- Correspondence address. Reproductive Medicine Unit, Elizabeth Garrett Anderson Wing, University College London Hospitals, London, UK, WC1E 6DB. E-mail:
| |
Collapse
|