Intrauterine injection of HCG before embryo transfer: a parallel, double-blind randomized trial.

RESEARCH QUESTION: Does intrauterine administration of HCG before embryo transfer improve live birth rate during IVF cycles? DESIGN: A parallel, randomized controlled trial conducted between July 2018 and February 2020. Infertile women (n = 181) scheduled for fresh or vitrified-warmed embryo transfer after IVF carried out for any indication were randomized in a 1:1 ratio to receive either HCG (500 IU in 0.1 ml of tissue culture media) or culture media (0.1 ml of tissue culture media) via intrauterine injection 4 min before embryo transfer. In both groups, an intrauterine insemination catheter was used for administering the medication. Primary outcome was live birth, with ongoing pregnancy and clinical pregnancy as secondary outcomes. Analysis was based on intention-to-treat principle. RESULTS: Baseline and cycle characteristics were comparable between the two groups. In the control group, one woman with a confirmed clinical pregnancy was lost to follow-up. Live birth rates were 24% (22/90) in the HCG group versus 19% (17/90) in the control group (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.74 to 2.27). Clinical pregnancy and ongoing pregnancy rates were 34% versus 26% (RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.84 to 2.04) and 24% versus 19% (RR 1.29, 95% CI 0.74 to 2.27) in the HCG and the control groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: Intrauterine injection of HCG before embryo transfer did not improve live birth rates in women undergoing IVF. As the study was designed to detect a 20% difference between groups, a smaller, clinically important difference could not be ruled out. Treatment outcomes were lower than expected in the control group.

Progesterone/Oestradiol ratio can Better Predict Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection Outcomes than Absolute Progesterone Level.

BACKGROUND: Several parameters were proposed to predict the impact of premature luteinization on intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) outcomes such as isolated progesterone (P) level, progesterone to oocyte ratio, and progesterone/estradiol ratio (P/E2). AIM: The aim of this study is to compare the predictive value of P/E2 ratio and isolated P level on the ovulation triggering day for pregnancy outcomes in fresh GnRH antagonist ICSI cycles. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study conducted in a university-affiliated in vitro fertilization center between January 2017 and April 2019. METHODS: The study included women who underwent their first- or second-ranked GnRH antagonist ICSI cycles with day-3 embryo transfer. P/E2 ratio was calculated as (P [ng/mL] × 1000)/E2 (pg/mL). Cutoff values of ≥1.5 ng/ml for high P (HP) and ≥0.55 for HP/E2 ratio were chosen based on the literature. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: A receiver operating curve was performed to detect the predictability of serum P/E2 and P for the ongoing pregnancy rate. First, patients were divided according to either P level (low P < 1.5 ng/mL and HP ≥1.5 ng/mL) or P/E2 ratio (low P/E2 <0.55 and HP/E2 ≥ 0.55). Patients were further divided into four subgroups: (Group A: HP and HP/E2 ratio, Group B: low P and low P/E2 ratio, Group C: HP only, and Group D: HP/E2 only). A multivariate regression analysis models were used to account for the effect of the cycle confounders on the likelihood of pregnancy. RESULTS: A total of 402 ICSI cycles were analyzed. The area under the curve was 0.67 and 0.59 for P/E2 and P, respectively. P/E2 showed a significant association with ongoing pregnancy (adjusted odds ratios [aOR]: 0.409, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.222-0.753, P = 0.004) while HP revealed no significant predictive value (aOR: 0.542, 95% CI 0.284-1.036, P = 0.064) after the multivariate analysis. CONCLUSIONS: P elevation may not present as an independent predictor for cycle outcomes. P/E2 ratio has a better prognostic value than P alone in predicting pregnancy of GnRH antagonist cycles.

Effect of Metformin on Premature Luteinization and Pregnancy Outcomes in Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection-Fresh Embryo Transfer Cycles: A Randomized Double-Blind Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Premature luteinization (PL) is not unusual in in vitro fertilization (IVF) and could not be wholly avoided by using either gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists or GnRH antagonist regimens. The study aims to evaluate metformin's efficacy in preventing PL in fresh GnRH antagonist intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles with cleavage-stage embryo transfer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial was conducted in a tertiary university IVF center. We recruited infertile women who were scheduled to perform their first or second ICSI trial. Eligible women were recruited and randomized in a 1:1 ratio into two groups. Metformin was administered in a dose of 1500 mg per day since the start of contraceptive pills in the cycle antecedent to stimulation cycle until the day of ovulation triggering, while women in the placebo group received a placebo for the same regimen and duration. The primary outcome was the incidence of PL, defined as serum progesterone (P) on the triggering day ≥1.5 ng/mL. Secondary outcomes comprised the live birth, ongoing pregnancy, implantation, and good-quality embryos rates. RESULTS: The trial involved 320 eligible participants (n=160 in each group). Both groups had comparable stimulation days, endometrial thickness, peak estradiol levels, number of oocytes retrieved, and number of mature oocytes. Metformin group experienced lower level of serum P (P<0.001) and incidence of PL (10 vs. 23.6%, P=0.001). Moreover, lower progesterone/estradiol (P/E) ratio and progesterone to mature oocyte index (PMOI) (P=0.002 and P=0.002, respectively) were demonstrated in women receiving metformin. Metformin group generated a better rate of goodquality embryos (P=0.005) and ongoing pregnancy (43.8 vs. 31.8%, P=0.026). A similar trend, though of borderline significance, was observed in the live birth rate in favor of metformin administration (38.15 vs. 27.5%, P=0.04). CONCLUSION: Metformin could be used in patients with potential PL to improve fresh cycle outcomes by preventing PL (Registration number: NCT03088631).

FIRSTT study: randomized controlled trial of uterine artery embolization vs focused ultrasound surgery.

BACKGROUND: Uterine leiomyomas (fibroid tumors) cause considerable symptoms in 30-50% of women and are the leading cause of hysterectomy in the United States. Women with uterine fibroid tumors often seek uterine-preserving treatments, but comparative effectiveness trials are lacking. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to report treatment effectiveness and ovarian function after uterine artery embolization vs magnetic resonance imaging-guided focused ultrasound surgery from the Fibroid Interventions: Reducing Symptoms Today and Tomorrow study. STUDY DESIGN: The Fibroid Interventions: Reducing Symptoms Today and Tomorrow study, which is a randomized controlled trial of uterine artery embolization vs magnetic resonance imaging-guided focused ultrasound surgery, enrolled premenopausal women with symptomatic uterine fibroid tumors; women who declined randomization were enrolled in a parallel observational cohort. A comprehensive cohort design was used for outcomes analysis. Our target enrollment was 220 women, of which we achieved 41% (n=91) in the randomized and parallel arms of the trial. Primary outcome was reintervention for uterine fibroid tumors within 36 months. Secondary outcomes were change in serum anti-Müllerian hormone levels and standardized measures of fibroid symptoms, quality of life, pain, and sexual function. RESULTS: From 2010-2014, 83 women (mean age, 44.4 years) were treated in the comprehensive cohort design (43 for magnetic resonance imaging-guided focused ultrasound surgery [27 randomized]; 40 for uterine artery embolization [22 randomized]); baseline clinical and uterine characteristics were similar between treatment arms, except for higher fibroid load in the uterine artery embolization arm. The risk of reintervention was higher with magnetic resonance imaging-guided focused ultrasound surgery than uterine artery embolization (hazard ratio, 2.81; 95% confidence interval, 1.01-7.79). Uterine artery embolization showed a significantly greater absolute decrease in anti-Müllerian hormone levels at 24 months compared with magnetic resonance imaging-guided focused ultrasound surgery. Quality of life and pain scores improved in both arms but to a greater extent in the uterine artery embolization arm. Higher pretreatment anti-Müllerian hormone level and younger age at treatment increased the overall risk of reintervention. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates a lower reintervention rate and greater improvement in symptoms after uterine artery embolization, although some of the effectiveness may come through impairment of ovarian reserve. Both pretreatment anti-Müllerian hormone level and age are associated with risk of reintervention. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT00995878, clinicaltrials.gov.

Periprocedural outcomes comparing fibroid embolization and focused ultrasound: a randomized controlled trial and comprehensive cohort analysis.

BACKGROUND: Uterine fibroids are a common problem for reproductive-aged women, yet little comparative effectiveness research is available to guide treatment choice. Uterine artery embolization and magnetic resonance imaging-guided focused ultrasound surgery are minimally invasive therapies approved by the US Food and Drug Administration for treating symptomatic uterine fibroids. The Fibroid Interventions: Reducing Symptoms Today and Tomorrow study is the first randomized controlled trial to compare these 2 fibroid treatments. OBJECTIVE: The objective of the study was to summarize treatment parameters and compare recovery trajectory and adverse events in the first 6 weeks after treatment. STUDY DESIGN: Premenopausal women with symptomatic uterine fibroids seen at 3 US academic medical centers were enrolled in the randomized controlled trial (n = 57). Women meeting identical criteria who declined randomization but agreed to study participation were enrolled in a nonrandomized parallel cohort (n = 34). The 2 treatment groups were analyzed by using a comprehensive cohort design. All women undergoing focused ultrasound and uterine artery embolization received the same postprocedure prescriptions, instructions, and symptom diaries for comparison of recovery in the first 6 weeks. Return to work and normal activities, medication use, symptoms, and adverse events were captured with postprocedure diaries. Data were analyzed using the Wilcoxon rank sum test or χ2 test. Multivariable regression was used to adjust for baseline pain levels and fibroid load when comparing opioid medication, adverse events, and recovery time between treatment groups because these factors varied at baseline between groups and could affect outcomes. Adverse events were also collected. RESULTS: Of 83 women in the comprehensive cohort design who underwent treatment, 75 completed postprocedure diaries. Focused ultrasound surgery was a longer procedure than embolization (mean [SD], 405 [146] vs 139 [44] min; P <.001). Of women undergoing focused ultrasound (n = 43), 23 (53%) underwent 2 treatment days. Immediate self-rated postprocedure pain was higher after uterine artery embolization than focused ultrasound (median [interquartile range], 5 [1-7] vs 1 [1-4]; P = .002). Compared with those having focused ultrasound (n = 39), women undergoing embolization (n = 36) were more likely to use outpatient opioid (75% vs 21%; P < .001) and nonsteroidal antiinflammatory medications (97% vs 67%; P < .001) and to have a longer median (interquartile range) recovery time (days off work, 8 [6-14] vs 4 [2-7]; P < .001; days until return to normal, 15 [10-29] vs 10 [10-15]; P = .02). There were no significant differences in the incidence or severity of adverse events between treatment arms; 86% of adverse events (42 of 49) required only observation or nominal treatment, and no events caused permanent sequelae or death. After adjustment for baseline pain and uterine fibroid load, uterine artery embolization was still significantly associated with higher opioid use and longer time to return to work and normal activities (P < .001 for each). Results were similar when restricted to the randomized controlled trial. CONCLUSION: Women undergoing uterine artery embolization have longer recovery times and use more prescription medications, but women undergoing focused ultrasound have longer treatment times. These findings were independent of baseline pain levels and fibroid load.

A randomized clinical trial of the efficacy of single versus double-daily dose of oral iron for prevention of iron deficiency anemia in women with twin gestations.

OBJECTIVE: The study aims to assess the efficacy of single versus double-daily oral iron dose on prevention of iron deficiency anemia in women with twin gestations. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A randomized controlled trial (NCT02858505) conducted at Woman's Health Hospital, Assiut, Egypt, between August 2015 and June 2016 included 120 non-anemic pregnant women with twin gestations in the first trimester. Women were randomly assigned to either group I (27 mg elemental iron) or group II (54 mg elemental iron) daily starting from 12 weeks of pregnancy till 36 weeks. The primary outcomes included the mean level of hemoglobin, hematocrit and serum ferritin at 36 weeks' gestation. RESULTS: Both iron doses maintained the mean hemoglobin and hematocrit within the normal level from 12 weeks to 36 weeks (p = 0.378 and p = 0.244, respectively). However, the mean serum ferritin level was higher in group II than group I (p = 0.000) at 36 weeks' gestation. Moreover, women in group II reported more side effects than group I at 36 weeks' gestation. CONCLUSIONS: Doubling the prophylactic iron dose is comparable to single dose in the prevention of iron deficiency anemia among women with twin gestations with more side effects.

Effect of cervical lidocaine-prilocaine cream on pain perception during copper T380A intrauterine device insertion among parous women: A randomized double-blind controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: The objective was to investigate the analgesic effect of cervical lidocaine-prilocaine (LP) cream in alleviating pain during copper T380A intrauterine device (IUD) insertion among parous women. STUDY DESIGN: We conducted a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial at Assiut Women's Health Hospital, Egypt, from October 2015 to April 2016 of parous women desiring copper IUD insertion. We randomized the subjects in a 1:1 ratio to LP cream or placebo. Seven minutes prior to IUD insertion, women received 2 ml of LP cream or placebo to the anterior cervical lip, followed by 2 ml placed in the cervical canal using a Q-tip applicator. The study end point was the subjects' self-reported pain using a 10-cm visual analog scale (VAS) during cervical tenaculum placement, sound insertion, IUD insertion and 5 min postprocedure. We considered a 2-cm difference in VAS scores between study groups as clinically significant. Also, the difference in the ease of insertion score using a 10-cm VAS with 0=very easy insertion and 10=terribly difficult insertion was assessed. RESULTS: The study included 120 women (n=60 in each group). LP cream reduces the median VAS pain scores during tenaculum placement (2 vs. 4), sound insertion (3 vs. 6) and IUD insertion (3 vs. 6.5) with p=.0001 at all steps. A lower ease of insertion score was also determined among LP women (2.5±0.98 vs. 4.5±2.7, p=.001). Participants reported no side effects. CONCLUSIONS: Use of cervical LP cream prior to copper T380A IUD insertion may alleviate the IUD insertion pain among parous women. IMPLICATIONS: Cervical LP cream could be effective as an analgesic prior to copper T380A IUD insertion with no side effects. Further studies are needed to assess the women's satisfaction from lying with a speculum in place for 7 min while waiting for the cream to be effective.

Fibroid interventions: reducing symptoms today and tomorrow: extending generalizability by using a comprehensive cohort design with a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Uterine fibroids are an important source of morbidity for reproductive-aged women. Despite an increasing number of alternatives, hysterectomies account for about 75% of all fibroid interventional treatments. Evidence is lacking to help women and their health care providers decide among alternatives to hysterectomy. Fibroid Interventions: Reducing Symptoms Today and Tomorrow (NCT00995878, clinicaltrials.gov) is a randomized controlled trial to compare the safety, efficacy, and economics of 2 minimally invasive alternatives to hysterectomy: uterine artery embolization and magnetic resonance imaging-guided focused ultrasound surgery. Although randomized trials provide the highest level of evidence, they have been difficult to conduct in the United States for interventional fibroid treatments. Thus, contemporaneously recruiting women declining randomization may have value as an alternative strategy for comparative effectiveness research. OBJECTIVE: We sought to compare baseline characteristics of randomized participants with nonrandomized participants meeting the same enrollment criteria and to determine whether combining the 2 cohorts in a comprehensive cohort design would be useful for analysis. STUDY DESIGN: Premenopausal women with symptomatic uterine fibroids seeking interventional therapy at 3 US academic medical centers were randomized (1:1) in 2 strata based on calculated uterine volume (<700 and ≥700 cc(3)) to undergo embolization or focused ultrasound surgery. Women who met the same inclusion criteria but declined randomization were offered enrollment in a parallel cohort. Both cohorts were followed up for a maximum of 36 months after treatment. The measures addressed in this report were baseline demographics, symptoms, fibroid and uterine characteristics, and scores on validated quality-of-life measures. RESULTS: Of 723 women screened, 57 were randomized and 49 underwent treatment (27 with focused ultrasound and 22 with embolization). Seven of the 8 women randomized but not treated were assigned to embolization. Of 34 women in the parallel cohort, 16 elected focused ultrasound and 18 elected embolization. Compared with nonrandomized participants, randomized participants had higher mean body mass index (28.7 vs 25.3 kg/m(2); P = .01) and were more likely to be gravid (77% vs 47%; P = .003) and smokers (42% vs 12%; P = .003). Age, race, uterine volume, number of fibroids, and baseline validated measures of general and disease-specific quality of life, pain, depression, and sexual function did not differ between the groups. When we performed a comprehensive cohort analysis and analyzed by treatment arm, the only baseline difference observed was a higher median McGill Pain Score among women undergoing focused ultrasound (10.5 vs 6; P = .03); a similar but nonsignificant trend was seen in visual analog scale scores for pain (median, 39.0 vs 24.0; P = .06). CONCLUSION: Using a comprehensive cohort analysis of study data could result in additional power and greater generalizability if results are adjusted for baseline differences.

Fetal cerebro-placental ratio and adverse perinatal outcome: systematic review and meta-analysis of the association and diagnostic performance.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this meta-analysis is to assess the value of fetal cerebro-placental Doppler ratio (CPR) in predicting adverse perinatal outcome in pregnancies with fetal growth restriction (FGR). METHODS: Three databases were used: MEDLINE, EMBASE (with online Ovid interface) and SCOPUS and studies from inception to April 2015 were included. Studies that reported perinatal outcomes of fetuses at risk of FGR or sonographically diagnosed FGR that were evaluated with CPR were considered eligible. Perinatal outcomes include cesarean section (CS) for fetal distress, APGAR scores at 5 min, neonatal complications and admission to neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Pooled data were expressed as odds ratio (OR) and confidence intervals (CI), and the summary receiver operating characteristic (SROC) curve was used to illustrate the diagnostic accuracy of CPR. RESULTS: Seven studies were eligible (1428 fetuses). Fetuses with abnormal CPR were at higher risk of CS for fetal distress (OR=4.49, 95% CI [1.63, 12.42]), lower APGAR scores (OR=4.01, 95% CI [2.65, 6.08]), admission to NICU (OR=9.65, 95% CI [3.02, 30.85]), and neonatal complications (OR=11.00, 95% [3.64, 15.37]) than fetuses who had normal CPR. These risks were higher among studies that included fetuses diagnosed with FGR than fetuses at risk of FGR. Abnormal CPR had higher diagnostic accuracy for adverse perinatal outcomes among "sonographically diagnosed FGR" studies than "at risk of FGR" studies. CONCLUSION: Abnormal CPR is associated with substantial risk of adverse perinatal outcomes. The test seems to be particularly useful for follow up of fetuses with sonographically diagnosed FGR.