Three-Dimensional Sonohysterography Compared With Vaginoscopic Hysteroscopy for Evaluation of the Uterine Cavity in Patients With Recurrent Implantation Failure in In Vitro Fertilization Cycles

ESHRE good practice recommendations on recurrent implantation failure

STUDY QUESTION

How should recurrent implantation failure (RIF) in patients undergoing ART be defined and managed?

SUMMARY ANSWER

This is the first ESHRE good practice recommendations paper providing a definition for RIF together with recommendations on how to investigate causes and contributing factors, and how to improve the chances of a pregnancy.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

RIF is a challenge in the ART clinic, with a multitude of investigations and interventions offered and applied in clinical practice, often without biological rationale or with unequivocal evidence of benefit.

STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION

This document was developed according to a predefined methodology for ESHRE good practice recommendations. Recommendations are supported by data from the literature, if available, and the results of a previously published survey on clinical practice in RIF and the expertise of the working group. A literature search was performed in PubMed and Cochrane focussing on 'recurrent reproductive failure', 'recurrent implantation failure', and 'repeated implantation failure'.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING METHODS

The ESHRE Working Group on Recurrent Implantation Failure included eight members representing the ESHRE Special Interest Groups for Implantation and Early Pregnancy, Reproductive Endocrinology, and Embryology, with an independent chair and an expert in statistics. The recommendations for clinical practice were formulated based on the expert opinion of the working group, while taking into consideration the published data and results of the survey on uptake in clinical practice. The draft document was then open to ESHRE members for online peer review and was revised in light of the comments received.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The working group recommends considering RIF as a secondary phenomenon of ART, as it can only be observed in patients undergoing IVF, and that the following description of RIF be adopted: 'RIF describes the scenario in which the transfer of embryos considered to be viable has failed to result in a positive pregnancy test sufficiently often in a specific patient to warrant consideration of further investigations and/or interventions'. It was agreed that the recommended threshold for the cumulative predicted chance of implantation to identify RIF for the purposes of initiating further investigation is 60%. When a couple have not had a successful implantation by a certain number of embryo transfers and the cumulative predicted chance of implantation associated with that number is greater than 60%, then they should be counselled on further investigation and/or treatment options. This term defines clinical RIF for which further actions should be considered. Nineteen recommendations were formulated on investigations when RIF is suspected, and 13 on interventions. Recommendations were colour-coded based on whether the investigations/interventions were recommended (green), to be considered (orange), or not recommended, i.e. not to be offered routinely (red).

LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION

While awaiting the results of further studies and trials, the ESHRE Working Group on Recurrent Implantation Failure recommends identifying RIF based on the chance of successful implantation for the individual patient or couple and to restrict investigations and treatments to those supported by a clear rationale and data indicating their likely benefit.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

This article provides not only good practice advice but also highlights the investigations and interventions that need further research. This research, when well-conducted, will be key to making progress in the clinical management of RIF.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS

The meetings and technical support for this project were funded by ESHRE. N.M. declared consulting fees from ArtPRED (The Netherlands) and Freya Biosciences (Denmark); Honoraria for lectures from Gedeon Richter, Merck, Abbott, and IBSA; being co-founder of Verso Biosense. He is Co-Chief Editor of Reproductive Biomedicine Online (RBMO). D.C. declared being an Associate Editor of Human Reproduction Update, and declared honoraria for lectures from Merck, Organon, IBSA, and Fairtility; support for attending meetings from Cooper Surgical, Fujifilm Irvine Scientific. G.G. declared that he or his institution received financial or non-financial support for research, lectures, workshops, advisory roles, or travelling from Ferring, Merck, Gedeon-Richter, PregLem, Abbott, Vifor, Organon, MSD, Coopersurgical, ObsEVA, and ReprodWissen. He is an Editor of the journals Archives of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Reproductive Biomedicine Online, and Editor in Chief of Journal Gynäkologische Endokrinologie. He is involved in guideline developments and quality control on national and international level. G.L. declared he or his institution received honoraria for lectures from Merck, Ferring, Vianex/Organon, and MSD. He is an Associate Editor of Human Reproduction Update, immediate past Coordinator of Special Interest Group for Reproductive Endocrinology of ESHRE and has been involved in Guideline Development Groups of ESHRE and national fertility authorities. D.J.M. declared being an Associate Editor for Human Reproduction Open and statistical Advisor for Reproductive Biomedicine Online. B.T. declared being shareholder of Reprognostics and she or her institution received financial or non-financial support for research, clinical trials, lectures, workshops, advisory roles or travelling from support for attending meetings from Ferring, MSD, Exeltis, Merck Serono, Bayer, Teva, Theramex and Novartis, Astropharm, Ferring. The other authors had nothing to disclose.

DISCLAIMER

This Good Practice Recommendations (GPR) document represents the views of ESHRE, which are the result of consensus between the relevant ESHRE stakeholders and are based on the scientific evidence available at the time of preparation. ESHRE GPRs should be used for information and educational purposes. They should not be interpreted as setting a standard of care or be deemed inclusive of all proper methods of care, or be exclusive of other methods of care reasonably directed to obtaining the same results. They do not replace the need for application of clinical judgement to each individual presentation, or variations based on locality and facility type. Furthermore, ESHRE GPRs do not constitute or imply the endorsement, or favouring, of any of the included technologies by ESHRE.

Comparison of diagnostic accuracy of saline infusion sonohysterography, transvaginal sonography, and hysteroscopy in evaluating the endometrial polyps in women with abnormal uterine bleeding: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

In women with abnormal uterine bleeding (AUB), endometrial polyps are a frequent finding, and the risk of a focal (pre)malignancy in a polyp is up to 6%. Because of this reported risk, the detection of polyps in these women is important.

Aim

To evaluate and compare the diagnostic accuracy of saline infusion sonohysterography, transvaginal sonography, and hysteroscopy in detecting endometrial polyps in women with AUB.

Material and methods

The searches were conducted by two independent researchers to find the relevant studies published from 1/1/2009 until the end of 30/06/2019. We searched for published literature in English language in MEDLINE, EMBASETM, The Cochrane Library, and Trip database. For literature published in other languages, we searched national databases (Magiran and SID), KoreaMed, and LILACS. The risk of bias of every article was evaluated by using QUADAS-2.

Results

After selection and quality assessment, 11 studies were included. Based on the random effect model the total prevalence of endometrial polyps in women with abnormal uterine bleeding was 38%. The sensitivity and specificity of saline infusion sonohysterography in diagnosis of endometrial polyps were 0.87 and 0.86, respectively. The sensitivity and specificity of transvaginal ultrasonography were 0.62 and 0.73 and the sensitivity and specificity of hysteroscopy were 0.92 and 0.85, respectively.

Conclusions

Although that sonohysterography is a safe and relatively cheap method, which allows ruling out or confirming endometrial polyps, it cannot be replaced with hysteroscopy due to the fact that hysteroscopy combined with biopsy is the gold standard for ruling out malignancies in an endometrial polyp.

Recurrent implantation failure in IVF: A Canadian Fertility and Andrology Society Clinical Practice Guideline

Recurrent implantation failure (RIF) after IVF is a challenging topic for clinicians and can be a devastating reality for some patients with infertility. The purpose of this guideline from the Canadian Fertility and Andrology Society (CFAS) is to provide the most relevant evidence to date for the assessment and management of RIF. This guideline was developed using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) approach. This guideline recognizes the presence of heterogeneity in the definition of RIF. Recommendations are offered here on the investigation of RIF and management options that may increase the chance of a live birth.

ART and uterine pathology: how relevant is the maternal side for implantation?

BACKGROUND

Assisted reproduction technology (ART) has become a standard treatment for infertile couples. Increased success rates obtained over the years have resulted primarily from improved embryo quality, but implantation rates still remain lower than expected. The uterus, an important player in implantation, has been frequently neglected. While a number of uterine pathologies have been associated with decreased natural fertility, less information exists regarding the impact of these pathologies in ART. This report reviews the evidence to help clinicians advise ART patients.

METHODS

An electronic search of PubMed and EMBASE was performed to identify articles in the English, French or Spanish language published until May 2014 which addressed uterine pathology and ART. Data from natural conception were used only in the absence of data from ART. Studies were classified in decreasing categories: RCTs, prospective controlled trials, prospective non-controlled trials, retrospective studies and experimental studies. Studies included in lower categories were only used if insufficient evidence was available. Pooled data were obtained from systematic reviews with meta-analyses when available. The summary of the evidence for the different outcomes and the degree of the recommendation for interventions were based on the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) statement recommendations.

RESULTS

There is strong evidence that surrogacy is effective for uterine agenesia. For the remaining pathologies, however, there is very little evidence that the established treatments improve outcomes, or that these pathologies have a negative effect on ART. In the presence of an apparently normal uterus, assessing endometrial receptivity (ER) is the goal; however diagnostic tests are still under development.

CONCLUSIONS

The real effect of different uterine/endometrial integrity pathologies on ART is not known. Moreover, currently proposed treatments are not based on solid evidence, and little can be done to assess ER in normal or abnormal conditions. No strong recommendations can be given based on the published experience, bringing an urgent need for well-designed studies. In this context, we propose algorithms to study the uterus in ART.

3D sonohysterography vs hysteroscopy: a cross-sectional study for the evaluation of endouterine diseases

PURPOSE

To assess the concordance between the presumed diagnosis obtained with the 3D sonohysterography (SHG) and with the diagnostic hysteroscopy (HYS); to determine whether the 3D SHG has the accuracy needed to be considered as a diagnostic screening standard in cases of suspected endouterine pathology.

METHODS

We selected 224 patients who voluntarily decided to undergo 3D SHG from a population with suspected presence of endouterine disease at TVS. The patients underwent first 3D SHG and then diagnostic HYS. We recorded each patient's discomfort/pain during the two techniques. We used the "Bayes Theorem" to calculate the sensitivity and specificity of the 3D SHG as compared to HYS.

RESULTS

Overall the 3D SHG diagnosis was confirmed in 156/224 cases (69.64 %). Concordance for endometrial thickening was 0 %; for Asherman's syndrome was 50.00 %; for polyp was 77.78 %; and for myoma, mucus accumulation and Müllerian anomalies (arcuate uterus, septate and subseptate uterus) was 100.00 %. Furthermore, 3D SHG was better tolerated than HYS.

CONCLUSION

Despite the diagnostic accuracy and mini-invasiveness of 3D SHG, we suggest that it cannot be a substitute of HYS in endouterine disease diagnosis, but it could be considered as a good method of screening to address patients to hysteroscopic confirmation.

Diagnostic accuracy of three-dimensional sonohysterography compared with office hysteroscopy and its interrater/intrarater agreement in uterine cavity assessment after hysteroscopic metroplasty

OBJECTIVE

To compare the diagnostic accuracy of three-dimensional sonohysterography (3D-SIS) and office hysteroscopy in uterine cavity assessment after hysteroscopic metroplasty (HM) and determine the interrater/intrarater agreement for 3D-SIS.

DESIGN

Prospective observational study.

SETTING

University hospital, private hospital, and clinic.

PATIENT(S)

One hundred forty-one women undergoing HM for septate uterus with a history of miscarriage and/or infertility.

INTERVENTION(S)

3D-SIS and office hysteroscopy at 6-8 weeks after HM.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Shape of the uterine cavity, length of the fundal notch (≥1 or <1 cm), and the presence of intrauterine adhesions were assessed, and the interrater/intrarater agreement of 3D-SIS was evaluated in 30 randomly selected patients.

RESULT(S)

Uterine abnormalities were detected with the use of hysteroscopy in 18 (12.8%) of 141 women. 3D-SIS was highly accurate (97.2%), sensitive (97%), and specific (100%), with a positive predictive value of 100% and a negative predictive value of 85%. The diagnostic values of hysteroscopy and 3D-SIS were not significantly different (McNemar test). 3D-SIS showed substantial interrater/intrarater agreement regarding overall uterine cavity evaluation (κ = 0.79 and 0.78, respectively).

CONCLUSION(S)

3D-SIS demonstrated substantial interrater/intrarater agreement for the postoperative evaluation of the uterine cavity, being as diagnostically accurate as hysteroscopy. The use of second-look hysteroscopy may be limited to cases that require reoperation.