ABSTRACT
Background: For success in IVF treatment, it is essential that the patient has a responsive endometrium together with many other factors. Inspite of numerous treatments available today for growth of endometrium, there is lack of any ideal drug or protocol for increasing endometrial thickness. The study is an attempt to evaluate the role of two drugs for increasing endometrial growth before embryos transfers.Methods: This study is a retrospective cohort study including 50 patients with previously diagnosed as thin endometrium patients who may or may not have failed previous cycles of IVF. Patients were randomly divided into two groups. First group-Group A (n=25) are patients randomly selected to undergo intrauterine PRP instillation for increase in endometrial thickness before embryo transfer. Second group-Group B (n=25) are randomly selected from a retrospective cohort of thin endometrium to take injection GCSF as intrauterine infusion (total dose 300mcg) on day of trigger or day 11 of cycle followed by 60 units subcutaneously after embryo transfer. The difference in endometrial thickness during transfer and the pregnancy outcomes were compared.Results: Injection GCSF was found to be more effective than intrauterine PRP in improving endometrial thickness in patients with thin endometrium with a p-value of <0.0001. It was found that the chemical and clinical pregnancy rates were comparable as the p values were 0.77 and 0.37 respectively and hence statistically not significant. Although patients given injection GCSF had a slightly higher clinical pregnancy rate (44%) as compared to patients given intrauterine PRP which was 28%. All other variables were comparable.Conclusions: In the study it was proven that injection GCSF, is more effective for the treatment of thin endometrium patients as compared to intrauterine PRP infusion. Though the clinical and chemical pregnancy rates were comparable, a higher percentage of women were clinically pregnant in the group given injection GCSF. Intrauterine PRP can also be a good alternative for thin endometrium. More studies and RCTS are needed for comparison to prove the effectiveness of these drugs for treatment of thin endometrium.
ABSTRACT
Background: Elective frozen embryo transfer (FET), has recently increased significantly with improvements in cryopreservation techniques. Observational studies and randomized controlled trials suggested that the endometrium in stimulated cycles is not optimally prepared for implantation; risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome reduced and pregnancy rates increased following FET and perinatal outcomes are less affected after FET. However, the evidence is not unequivocal and recent randomised control trials challenge the use of elective FET for the general IVF population. Pregnancy rates were analysed in a cohort of patients undergoing embryo transfers.Methods: This was a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent embryo transfers from April 2018 to March 2019 at study centre in Surat.175 cycles of embryo transfers (119 fresh and 56 frozen) were included in the study. Outcomes measured were positive pregnancy, clinical pregnancy and ongoing clinical pregnancy rates achieved in the IVF-ET cycles.Results: There were no statistically significant differences between positive pregnancy rate (54.6% versus 60.7%, Odds ratio (OR) 0.78; 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.41-1.49), clinical pregnancy rate (48.73% versus 57.14%, OR 0.52; 95% CI 0.1- 2.64) and ongoing clinical pregnancy rate (45.38% versus 51.78% OR 1.4; 95% CI 0.29 - 6.67) in fresh ET and FET cycles, respectively, p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant for all measures.Conclusions: Despite the observed higher rates of positive biochemical, clinical and ongoing clinical pregnancy per transfer in the FET cohort, these did not reach statistical significance. Thus, both transfer strategies are reasonable options, although there is a trend favouring the freeze-all strategy.