Intrauterine interventions for women with two or more implantation failures: A systematic review and network meta-analysis

7Citations
Citations of this article
14Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Objective: To compare the effectiveness of different intrauterine interventions for women with two or more unexplained implantation failures. Design: A systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Patient(s): Women with two or more implantation failures undergoing fresh or frozen embryo transfer (ET). Intervention(s): An electronic search of the following databases: Pubmed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and Embase. Main Outcome Measure(s): Clinical pregnancy, live birth/ongoing pregnancy, and miscarriage. Result(s): We included 21 RCTs(3079 women) in the network meta-analysis. The network meta-analysis showed that compared with control treatment, platelet-rich plasma(PRP), peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMC), granulocyte colony-stimulating factor(G-CSF), human chorionic gonadotropin(HCG), and endometrial scratch(ES) significantly increased clinical pregnancy(OR 3.78, 95% CI 2.72 to 5.25; 2.79, 95% CI 1.75 to 4.45; 1.93, 95% CI 1.37 to 2.72; 1.80, 95% CI 1.18 to 2.72; 1.75, 95% CI 1.29 to 2.36, respectively). PRP ranked the highest in improving clinical pregnancy, followed by PBMC, G-CSF, HCG, and ES. Compared with control treatment, PRP, PBMC, and ES significantly increased live birth/ongoing pregnancy (OR 5.96, 95% CI 3.38 to 10.52; OR 2.55, 95% CI 1.27 to 5.11; OR 1.70, 95% CI 1.07 to 2.69, respectively). PRP ranked the highest in improving live birth/ongoing pregnancy, followed by PBMC, and ES. Conclusion(s): PRP is the most effective intrauterine intervention in improving pregnancy outcome in women with two or more implantation failures.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Jin, X. H., Li, Y., & Li, D. (2022, August 29). Intrauterine interventions for women with two or more implantation failures: A systematic review and network meta-analysis. Frontiers in Endocrinology. Frontiers Media S.A. https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2022.959121

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free