Outcome of donor versus husband insemination in couples with unexplained infertility treated by in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer

The definition of unexplained infertility: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

There is no consensus on tests required to either diagnose unexplained infertility or use for research inclusion criteria. This leads to heterogeneity and bias affecting meta-analysis and best practice advice.

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review analyses the variability of inclusion criteria applied to couples with unexplained infertility. We propose standardised criteria for use both in future research studies and clinical diagnosis.

SEARCH STRATEGY

CINAHL and MEDLINE online databases were searched up to November 2022 for all published studies recruiting couples with unexplained infertility, available in full text in the English language.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were collected in an Excel spreadsheet. Results were analysed per category and methodology or reference range.

MAIN RESULTS

Of 375 relevant studies, only 258 defined their inclusion criteria. The most commonly applied inclusion criteria were semen analysis, tubal patency and assessment of ovulation in 220 (85%), 232 (90%), 205 (79.5%) respectively. Only 87/220 (39.5%) studies reporting semen analysis used the World Health Organization (WHO) limits. Tubal patency was accepted if bilateral in 145/232 (62.5%) and if unilateral in 24/232 (10.3%). Ovulation was assessed using mid-luteal serum progesterone in 115/205 (56.1%) and by a history of regular cycles in 87/205 (42.4%). Other criteria, including uterine cavity assessment and hormone profile, were applied in less than 50% of included studies.

CONCLUSIONS

This review highlights the heterogeneity among studied populations with unexplained infertility. Development and application of internationally accepted criteria will improve the quality of research and future clinical care.

Assisted reproductive technology with donor sperm: national trends and perinatal outcomes

BACKGROUND

Information regarding the use of donor sperm in assisted reproductive technology, as well as subsequent treatment and perinatal outcomes, remains limited. Outcome data would aid patient counseling and clinical decision making.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of the study were to report national trends in donor sperm utilization and live birth rates of donor sperm-assisted reproductive technology cycles in the United States and to compare assisted reproductive technology treatment and perinatal outcomes between cycles using donor and nondonor sperm. We hypothesize these outcomes to be comparable between donor and nondonor sperm cycles.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a retrospective cohort study using data from all US fertility centers reporting to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's National Assisted Reproductive Technology Surveillance System, accounting for ∼98% of assisted reproductive technology cycles (definition excludes intrauterine insemination). The number and percentage of assisted reproductive technology cycles using donor sperm and rates of pregnancy, live birth, preterm birth (<37 weeks), and low birthweight (<2500 g) were the primary outcomes measured. Treatments assessed include use of donor vs nondonor sperm. The trends analysis included all banking and fresh assisted reproductive technology cycles using donor and autologous oocytes performed between 1996 and 2014 (n = 1,710,034). The outcomes analysis was restricted to include only fresh autologous cycles performed between 2010 and 2014 (n = 437,569) to focus on cycles with a potential outcome and cycles reflective of current practice, thereby improving the clinical relevance. Cycles canceled prior to retrieval were excluded. Statistical analysis included linear regression to explore polynomial trends and log-binomial regression to estimate relative risk for outcomes among cycles using donor and nondonor sperm.

RESULTS

Of all banking and fresh donor and autologous oocyte assisted reproductive technology cycles performed between 1996 and 2014, 74,892 (4.4%) used donor sperm. In 2014, 7351 assisted reproductive technology cycles using donor sperm were performed, as compared with 1763 in 1996 (6.2% vs 3.8% of all cycles). Among all autologous oocyte cycles performed between 2010 and 2014, the live birth rate was lower for donor sperm (27.9%) than nondonor sperm cycles (32.5%); however, after adjustment for maternal age, donor sperm use was associated with an increased likelihood of live birth (adjusted relative risk, 1.06, 95% confidence interval, 1.01-1.10). Per transfer, there was no significant difference in live birth rates for donor vs nondonor sperm (31.9% vs 36.8%; adjusted relative risk, 1.04, 95% confidence interval, 0.998-1.09). Per singleton live birth, there was no significant difference in preterm birth (11.5% vs 11.8%; adjusted relative risk, 0.98, 95% confidence interval, 0.90-1.06); however, low birthweight delivery was slightly lower in donor sperm cycles (8.8% vs 9.4%; adjusted relative risk, 0.91, 95% confidence interval, 0.83-0.99).

CONCLUSION

Donor sperm use in assisted reproductive technology has increased in the United States, accounting for approximately 6% of all assisted reproductive technology cycles in 2014. Assisted reproductive technology treatment and perinatal outcomes were clinically similar in donor and nondonor sperm cycles.

Efficacy of treatment for unexplained infertility

OBJECTIVE

To analyze the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of alternative treatments for unexplained infertility.

DESIGN

Retrospective analysis of 45 published reports.

SETTING

Clinical practices.

PATIENT(S)

Couples who met criteria for unexplained infertility. Women with Stage I or Stage II endometriosis were included.

INTERVENTION(S)

Observation; clomiphene citrate (CC); gonadotropins (hMG); IUI; and GIFT and IVF.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Clinical pregnancy rate.

RESULT(S)

Combined pregnancy rates per initiated cycle, adjusted for study quality, were as follows: no treatment = 1.3%-4.1%; IUI = 3.8%; CC = 5.6%; CC + IUI = 8.3%; hMG = 7.7%; hMG + IUI = 17.1%; IVF = 20.7%; GIFT = 27.0%. The estimated cost per pregnancy was $10,000 for CC + IUI, $17,000 for hMG + IUI, and $50,000 for IVF.

CONCLUSION(S)

Clomiphene citrate + IUI is a cost-effective treatment for unexplained infertility. If this treatment fails, hMG + IUI and assisted reproduction are efficacious therapeutic options.

Factors that affect outcome of in-vitro fertilisation treatment

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness of in-vitro fertilisation (IVF) treatment depends both on the overall success rate in the treating clinic and on the characteristics of the couple seeking treatment. Since 1991, the Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) has been collecting information on all IVF cycles carried out in the UK. This database has been analysed to identify the factors that affect the outcome of treatment.

METHODS

All IVF treatment cycles and outcomes registered between August, 1991, and April, 1994, were identified (52507). Cycles that involved gamete or embryo donation, frozen embryo transfer, or micromanipulation and unstimulated cycles were excluded. Thus, 36961 cycles (70% of those registered) were included in the analysis. The main outcome measure was liverbirth rate per cycle started. The relation between age and outcome was investigated by fitting of different fractional polynomials of age with logistic regression models. All other factors were analysed by logistic regression with age included in the model.

FINDINGS

The overall livebirth rate per cycle of treatment was 13.9%. The highest livebirth rates were in the age-group 25-30 years; younger women had lower rates and there was a sharp decline in older women. At all ages over 30, use of donor eggs was associated with a significantly higher livebirth rate than use of the woman's own eggs, but there was also a downward trend in success rate with age (p = 0.04). After adjustment for age, there was a significant decrease in livebirth rate with increasing duration of infertility from 1 to 12 years (p < 0.001). The medical indication for treatment had no significant effect on the outcome. Previous pregnancy and livebirth significantly increased treatment success. The possibility of success decreased with each IVF treatment cycle.

INTERPRETATION

We were able to identify by logistic regression the factors that significantly affect the outcome of IVF treatment, and to measure the magnitude of that effect. These factors should be taken into account in assessment of IVF results. After allowance for background clinic success rates, these factors can be used to predict outcome in individual cases.