The effect of endometrial injury on implantation and clinical pregnancy rates

Dan Levin*, Joseph Hasson, Aviad Cohen, Yuval Or, Baris Ata, Lilia Barzilay, Benny Almog

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

20 Scopus citations

Abstract

Aim: To assess the effect of endometrial scratching (ES) on in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer outcome (IVF-ET) Materials and methods: Retrospective matched case control study including all fresh IVF cycles performed between January 2006 and December 2012 at an academic IVF center. ES with an endometrial biopsy catheter was performed in the cycle preceding the index IVF cycle. Patients (n = 238) were pair matched with controls according to age, number of previous failed IVF cycles and number of embryos transferred. Results: Demographic and cycle characteristics were comparable in all of the following: age, number of previous cycles, number of collected oocyte, number of embryos transferred and quality of transferred embryos. Implantation, clinical and ongoing pregnancy rates were comparable in both groups (28%, 34% and 18.4% vs 30%, 40.3% and 29%, in ES group and controls, respectively). Logistic regression analysis found no significant association between ES and pregnancy rate. Conclusions: Mechanical endometrial stimulation did not improve implantation and pregnancy rates. Furthermore, no factors that may predict which patients could benefit from ES were identified. Further prospective studies are warranted to evaluate possible benefits in different subsets of patients such as patients with recurrent implantation failures.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)779-782
Number of pages4
JournalGynecological Endocrinology
Volume33
Issue number10
DOIs
StatePublished - 3 Oct 2017

Keywords

  • Endometrial disruption
  • IVF-ET outcome
  • endometrial injury
  • endometrial scratching
  • implantation failure
  • pipelle

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'The effect of endometrial injury on implantation and clinical pregnancy rates'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this