Cervical mucus removal before embryo transfer in women undergoing in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Comparison of pregnancy outcomes of cervical mucus washing with physiologic saline solution or G-Rinse medium solution, in elective single-embryo transfers

AIM

To compare the pregnancy outcomes between physiologic saline and G-Rinse medium solution for cervical mucus washing, in fresh elective single-embryo transfers (ET) in women under the age of 37.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This was a retrospective data analysis performed in a single in vitro fertilization (IVF) center between February 2018 and November 2021. Women younger than 37 years who underwent single elective ET were included and all women had anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) levels ≥ 1.5 ng/ml. Age, body mass index (BMI), AMH levels, and pregnancy outcomes as clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) and live birth rate (LBR) were analyzed.

RESULTS

Study population consisted of 75 women in the G-Rinse medium solution group and 97 women in the physiologic saline group. Clinical pregnancy rate was 58.7% and 61.9% in the G-Rinse medium solution group and saline group, respectively (p = 0.673), and LBR was calculated as 41.3% and 47.4% in the G-Rinse medium solution group and saline group, respectively (p = 0.430). A log-binomial regression model was used and the model was adjusted for BMI to evaluate the effect of the cervical mucus washing method on the pregnancy outcomes. There was an estimated 5% decrease in the relative risk for CPR in the G-Rinse medium solution group compared to the saline group (95% CI: 0.74 to 1.2, p = 0.673). There was an estimated 13% reduction in the relative risk for LBR in the G-Rinse medium solution group compared to the saline group (95% CI: 0.62 to 1.23, p = 0.430). They were both statistically not significant.

CONCLUSION

In our study, the replacement of using G-Rinse medium solution to physiologic saline solution for cervical cleaning did not change CPR and LBR outcomes. Using physiologic saline solution can be a good alternative approach for ectocervical washing during embryo transfer in selected population because of its lower costs, easy accessibility, and common use.

Management of recurrent implantation failure: British Fertility Society policy and practice guideline

Recurrent implantation failure (RIF) is defined as the absence of a positive pregnancy test after three consecutive transfers of good quality embryos. There remains significant variation in clinical practice in the management of RIF. This British Fertility Society (BFS) Policy and Practice guideline analyses the evidence for investigations and therapies that are employed in RIF and provides recommendations for clinical practice and for further research. Evidence for investigations of sperm and egg quality, uterine and adnexal factors, immunological factors and thrombophilia, endocrine conditions and genetic factors and for associated therapies have been evaluated. This guideline has been devised to assist reproductive medicine specialists and patients in making shared decisions concerning management of RIF. Finally, suggestions for research towards improving understanding and management of RIF have also been provided.

Embryo transfer success: It is in our hands

Embryo transfer (ET) is considered as a critical step in the process of in vitro fertilization. Interestingly, studies have consistently shown significant outcome differences between physicians. Although the outcome of ET is not related to the physician's experience and specifically not different between fellows and attending physicians, certain techniques have been found to affect the success rate. This review summarizes the existing evidence regarding the impact of the individual physician performing ET and the techniques used.

Evidence and consensus on technical aspects of embryo transfer

BACKGROUND

Ultrasound-guided embryo transfer (US-GET) is a widely performed procedure, but standards for the best practice are not available.

OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE

This document aims to provide an overview of technical aspects of US-GET after considering the published data and including the preparation for the embryo transfer (ET) procedure, the actual procedure, the post-procedure care, associated pathologies, complications and risks, quality assurance and practitioners’ performance.

SEARCH METHODS

A literature search for evidence on key aspects of the ET procedure was carried out from database inception to November 2021. Selected papers (n = 359) relevant to the topic were analysed by the authors. The following key points were considered in the papers: whether ultrasound (US) practice standards were explained, to what extent the ET technique was described and whether complications or incidents and how to prevent such events were reported. In the end, 89 papers could be used to support the recommendations in this document, which focused on transabdominal US-GET.

OUTCOMES

The relevant papers found in the literature search were included in the current document and described according to the topic in three main sections: requirements and preparations prior to ET, the ET procedure, and training and competence for ET. Recommendations are provided on preparations prior to ET, equipment and materials, ET technique, possible risks and complications, training and competence. Specific aspects of the laboratory procedures are covered, in particular the different loading techniques and their potential impact on the final outcomes. Potential future developments and research priorities regarding the ET technique are also outlined.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

Many topics were not covered in the literature review and some recommendations were based on expert opinions and are not necessarily evidence based.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS

ET is the last procedural step in an ART treatment and is a crucial step toward achieving a pregnancy and live birth. The current paper set out to bring together the recent developments considering all aspects of ET, especially emphasizing US quality imaging. There are still many questions needing answers, and these can be subject of future research.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

No funding. ADA has received royalties from CRC Press and personal honorarium from Cook, Ferring and Cooper Surgical. The other co-authors have no conflicts of interest to declare that are relevant to the content of this article.

Clinical aspects of oocyte retrieval and embryo transfer. Tips and tricks for the novice and experts

Oocyte retrieval (ovum pick-up) and embryo transfer (ET) are essential steps in IVF and ICSI and over the years, the two procedures were developed in order to improve the clinical outcome. Many suggestions were proposed and applied before, during and after oocyte retrieval such as timing of HCG trigger, pre-operative pelvic scan, vaginal cleansing, type of anesthesia, type and gauge of aspiration needles, aspiration pressure, follicle flushing, and the need for prophylactic antibiotics. Similarly, many steps were suggested and implemented before, during and after ET including patient's position, type of anesthesia/analgesia, dummy (mock) ET, ultrasound-guidance, HCG injection in the uterine cavity, use of relaxing agents, full bladder, removal of the cervical mucus, flushing the cervix with culture medium, type of ET catheter, embryo loading techniques, site of embryo deposition, the use of adherence compounds, as well as bed rest after ET. Complications were also reported with oocyte retrieval and ET. The aim of this review is to evaluate the current practice of these two procedures in the light of available evidence.

Does rotation during catheter withdrawal in embryo transfer increase pregnancy rates?

BACKGROUND

The aim of this study was to determine whether there is a difference in pregnancy rates between groups that we removed directly and removed by rotating the embryo transfer catheter 360°.

METHODS

The study group consisted of 552 patients who were withdrawn by 360° rotation and 797 patients who were withdrawn without catheter rotation. All patients underwent one or two fresh ETs on day 3 or 5. Groups were compared in terms of cycle characteristics and clinical pregnancy rates.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in demographic and clinical characteristics of both groups, such as age, body mass index (BMI), duration of infertility, causes of infertility, and basal hormone levels. Clinicals pregnancy rate, in the study group, 48% (265/552) and in the control group, 50.8% (405/797) were similar in both groups. When the implantation rate and miscarriage rate were examined, both groups were found to be similar.

CONCLUSION

It was found that 360° rotation while pulling catheter during embryo transfer had no effect on pregnancy and clinical 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.

National Survey Highlights the Urgent Need for Standardisation of Embryo Transfer Techniques in the UK

Embryo transfer (ET) is one of the vital steps in the in vitro fertilisation (IVF) process, yet there is wide variation in ET technique throughout the UK, without a nationally approved standardised approach. The aim of this study was to gain contemporaneous information regarding the current clinical ET practice in the UK.

METHOD

A 38-question electronic survey was distributed to the 79 UK Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) registered clinics performing ETs.

RESULTS

In total, 59% (47/79) of units responded, 83% (39/47) performing ultrasound-guided transfers, with 42% (20/47) of units using a tenaculum; 22% (10/45) would proceed with transfer regardless of fluid in the endometrial cavity. In 91% (43/47) of units, embryos were deposited in the upper/middle portion of the uterine cavity, but interpretation of this area ranged from 0.5 to >2 cm from the fundus, with 68% (32/47) allowing patients to mobilise immediately after transfer. In 60% (27/45) of clinics, success rates were based on clinical pregnancy rates (CPR).

CONCLUSION

Within the UK there is a wide range of variability in ET techniques, with >70% of discordance in survey-responses between clinics. Whilst there are areas of good practice, some disadvantageous techniques continue to persist. This survey emphasises the importance of developing a standardised, evidence-based approach to improve ET success rates.

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.

Prospective Randomized Trial Comparing Embryo Transfers of Cases with and without Catheter Rotation during Its Withdrawal

OBJECTIVE

To compare embryo transfer (ET) technique based on catheter rotation during its withdrawal in cases with unexplained infertility in a prospective, randomized trial (NCT03097042).

METHODS

Two hundred intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) patients undergoing ET with cleaving or blastocyst-stage fresh embryos were randomized into 2 groups: cases with (n = 100), and without (n = 100) catheter rotation during its withdrawal. Groups were matched for age and some clinical parameters. A soft catheter was used to transfer a single embryo with catheter rotation during its withdrawal in the study group and without rotation in the control. The use of a stiff catheter or tenaculum was not needed in any case. Groups were compared in terms of cycle characteristics and clinical pregnancy rates.

RESULTS

Pregnancy rate was significantly higher in the study group (41 vs. 26%, p = 0.04). Clinical pregnancy rate was also significantly higher in the study group (39 vs. 25%, OR 1.9 [1.1-3.5], p = 0.05). On the other hand, the ongoing pregnancy rate was similar between the 2 groups (33 vs. 23%, p = 0.2).

CONCLUSION

Catheter rotation during its withdrawal may be associated with increased pregnancy and clinical pregnancy rates; however, the difference in ongoing pregnancy rates did not reach statistical significance.

Cervical mucus removal prior to intrauterine insemination: a randomized trial

OBJECTIVE

To detect if removing the cervical mucus before performing intrauterine insemination (IUI) could improve pregnancy outcomes in patients with unexplained infertility.

DESIGN

Prospective randomized study.

SETTING

An Egyptian University Hospital.

POPULATION

Seven hundred and fourteen couples with unexplained infertility who underwent intrauterine insemination (IUI) with or without cervical mucus removal.

METHODS

Using computer-generated numbers, patients were randomly allocated to cervical-mucus-removal (removed from both internal and external os) or non-mucus-removal groups. Only participants were blinded as to group assignment.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The clinical pregnancy rate.

RESULTS

Of 714 IUI patients between November 2014 and March 2017, 361 were in the mucus removal group, and 353 in the non-mucus-removal group. Difficult catheterization was encountered in 17 cases out of 666 (2.6%) 12 in the cervical-mucus-removal group and five in the non-mucus-removal group). A total of 666 IUI cycles were completed while 48 were either cancelled or lost in their follow-up. The clinical pregnancy rate was significantly higher in the mucus-removal group [31.0% (n = 112)] than in the non-mucus-removal group [21.8% (n = 77); P = 0.005]. Ovarian hyperstimulation developed in 33 (4.6%) cases: 18 cervical mucus-removal and 15 non-mucus-removal. All except one were mild and managed with outpatient care.

CONCLUSIONS

Cervical mucus removal before IUI could improve pregnancy outcomes in women with unexplained infertility.

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT

Cervical mucus removal before IUI can improve pregnancy outcomes.

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.