在体外受精-胚胎移植周期中,子宫内膜最大厚度为 7、8 或 9 毫米是否会影响活产率?

IF 2 Q2 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY Obstetrics and Gynecology Science Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-02 DOI:10.5468/ogs.22316
Einav Kadour-Peero, Ido Feferkorn, Shirel Hadad-Liven, Michael H Dahan
{"title":"在体外受精-胚胎移植周期中,子宫内膜最大厚度为 7、8 或 9 毫米是否会影响活产率?","authors":"Einav Kadour-Peero, Ido Feferkorn, Shirel Hadad-Liven, Michael H Dahan","doi":"10.5468/ogs.22316","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the effect of endometrial thickness (EMT) on live birth rates (LBR) in women with endometrial lining between 7.0-9.9 mm.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective cohort study included women who underwent fresh and frozen embryo transfers between 2008 and 2018, grouped according to their maximum EMT; group 1, 7.0-7.9 mm; group 2, 8.0-8.9 mm; and group 3, 9.0-9.9 mm and underwent blastocyst transfer.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study included 7,091 in-vitro fertilization cycles: 1,385 in group 1, 3,000 in group 2, and 2,706 in group 3. The combined LBR was 22.2%. The mean age of women at oocyte retrieval day was 36.7±4.5 years. There was no difference in female age at oocyte retrieval or in the quality of embryos transferred between the three groups. Group 1 had more diagnoses of diminished ovarian reserve (25.8% vs. 19.5% and 19.1%; p<0.001) and less male factor infertility compared with group 2 and 3, respectively (25.0% vs. 28.8% and 28.5%; P=0.024). LBR was higher with increasing endometrial thickness, group 2 vs. group 1 (22.0% vs. 17.4%; P=0.0004), group 3 vs. group 1 (25.0% vs. 17.2%; p<0.001), and group 3 vs. group 2 (25.0% vs. 22.0%; P=0.008). After controlling for confounding factors, these three groups did not differ in LBR (group 1 vs. group 2, odds ratio [OR], 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83-1.4; P=0.54 and group 1 vs. group 3, OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.90-1.51; P=0.24).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Live birth rates in women with endometrial thickness between 7.0-9.9 mm were not affected by different cut-offs when blastocyst transfer was performed.</p>","PeriodicalId":37602,"journal":{"name":"Obstetrics and Gynecology Science","volume":" ","pages":"497-505"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11424184/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Does it affect the live birth rates to have a maximum endometrial thickness of 7, 8, or 9 mm in in-vitro fertilization-embryo transfer cycles?\",\"authors\":\"Einav Kadour-Peero, Ido Feferkorn, Shirel Hadad-Liven, Michael H Dahan\",\"doi\":\"10.5468/ogs.22316\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To assess the effect of endometrial thickness (EMT) on live birth rates (LBR) in women with endometrial lining between 7.0-9.9 mm.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This retrospective cohort study included women who underwent fresh and frozen embryo transfers between 2008 and 2018, grouped according to their maximum EMT; group 1, 7.0-7.9 mm; group 2, 8.0-8.9 mm; and group 3, 9.0-9.9 mm and underwent blastocyst transfer.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study included 7,091 in-vitro fertilization cycles: 1,385 in group 1, 3,000 in group 2, and 2,706 in group 3. The combined LBR was 22.2%. The mean age of women at oocyte retrieval day was 36.7±4.5 years. There was no difference in female age at oocyte retrieval or in the quality of embryos transferred between the three groups. Group 1 had more diagnoses of diminished ovarian reserve (25.8% vs. 19.5% and 19.1%; p<0.001) and less male factor infertility compared with group 2 and 3, respectively (25.0% vs. 28.8% and 28.5%; P=0.024). LBR was higher with increasing endometrial thickness, group 2 vs. group 1 (22.0% vs. 17.4%; P=0.0004), group 3 vs. group 1 (25.0% vs. 17.2%; p<0.001), and group 3 vs. group 2 (25.0% vs. 22.0%; P=0.008). After controlling for confounding factors, these three groups did not differ in LBR (group 1 vs. group 2, odds ratio [OR], 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83-1.4; P=0.54 and group 1 vs. group 3, OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.90-1.51; P=0.24).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Live birth rates in women with endometrial thickness between 7.0-9.9 mm were not affected by different cut-offs when blastocyst transfer was performed.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":37602,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Obstetrics and Gynecology Science\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"497-505\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11424184/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Obstetrics and Gynecology Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5468/ogs.22316\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/8/2 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Obstetrics and Gynecology Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5468/ogs.22316","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/2 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的评估子宫内膜厚度(EMT)对子宫内膜厚度在7.0-9.9毫米之间的妇女的活产率(LBR)的影响:这项回顾性队列研究纳入了 2008 年至 2018 年间接受新鲜胚胎移植和冷冻胚胎移植的女性,根据其最大 EMT 进行分组:第 1 组:7.0-7.9 mm,第 2 组:8.0-8.9 mm,第 3 组:9.0-9.9 mm,并接受囊胚移植:研究包括 7091 个体外受精周期:综合 LBR 为 22.2%。取卵日女性的平均年龄为(36.2±4.5)岁。三组妇女取卵时的年龄和移植胚胎的质量没有差异。与第 2 组和第 3 组相比,第 1 组诊断出卵巢储备功能减退的比例更高(25.5% 对 19.5% 和 19.1%;P=0.001),而男性因素不孕症的比例较低(25.0% 对 28.8% 和 28.5%;P=0.02)。随着子宫内膜厚度的增加,活产率越高,第 2 组与第 1 组相比(22.0% 对 17.4%;P=0.0004),第 3 组与第 1 组相比(25.0% 对 17.2%;P=0.001):在进行囊胚移植时,子宫内膜厚度在 7.0-9.9 mm 之间的妇女的活产率不受不同截止值的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Does it affect the live birth rates to have a maximum endometrial thickness of 7, 8, or 9 mm in in-vitro fertilization-embryo transfer cycles?

Objective: To assess the effect of endometrial thickness (EMT) on live birth rates (LBR) in women with endometrial lining between 7.0-9.9 mm.

Methods: This retrospective cohort study included women who underwent fresh and frozen embryo transfers between 2008 and 2018, grouped according to their maximum EMT; group 1, 7.0-7.9 mm; group 2, 8.0-8.9 mm; and group 3, 9.0-9.9 mm and underwent blastocyst transfer.

Results: The study included 7,091 in-vitro fertilization cycles: 1,385 in group 1, 3,000 in group 2, and 2,706 in group 3. The combined LBR was 22.2%. The mean age of women at oocyte retrieval day was 36.7±4.5 years. There was no difference in female age at oocyte retrieval or in the quality of embryos transferred between the three groups. Group 1 had more diagnoses of diminished ovarian reserve (25.8% vs. 19.5% and 19.1%; p<0.001) and less male factor infertility compared with group 2 and 3, respectively (25.0% vs. 28.8% and 28.5%; P=0.024). LBR was higher with increasing endometrial thickness, group 2 vs. group 1 (22.0% vs. 17.4%; P=0.0004), group 3 vs. group 1 (25.0% vs. 17.2%; p<0.001), and group 3 vs. group 2 (25.0% vs. 22.0%; P=0.008). After controlling for confounding factors, these three groups did not differ in LBR (group 1 vs. group 2, odds ratio [OR], 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.83-1.4; P=0.54 and group 1 vs. group 3, OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.90-1.51; P=0.24).

Conclusion: Live birth rates in women with endometrial thickness between 7.0-9.9 mm were not affected by different cut-offs when blastocyst transfer was performed.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Obstetrics and Gynecology Science
Obstetrics and Gynecology Science Medicine-Obstetrics and Gynecology
CiteScore
3.80
自引率
15.80%
发文量
58
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: Obstetrics & Gynecology Science (NLM title: Obstet Gynecol Sci) is an international peer-review journal that published basic, translational, clinical research, and clinical practice guideline to promote women’s health and prevent obstetric and gynecologic disorders. The journal has an international editorial board and is published in English on the 15th day of every other month. Submitted manuscripts should not contain previously published material and should not be under consideration for publication elsewhere. The journal has been publishing articles since 1958. The aim of the journal is to publish original articles, reviews, case reports, short communications, letters to the editor, and video articles that have the potential to change the practices in women''s health care. The journal’s main focus is the diagnosis, treatment, prediction, and prevention of obstetric and gynecologic disorders. Because the life expectancy of Korean and Asian women is increasing, the journal''s editors are particularly interested in the health of elderly women in these population groups. The journal also publishes articles about reproductive biology, stem cell research, and artificial intelligence research for women; additionally, it provides insights into the physiology and mechanisms of obstetric and gynecologic diseases.
期刊最新文献
Current approach of patients with Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser syndrome. Usefulness and limitations of ChatGPT in getting information on teratogenic drugs exposed in pregnancy. Creation of neovagina in women with Müllerian agenesis (Mayer-Rokitansky-Küster-Hauser syndrome) using fresh human amnion. Lenvatinib and pembrolizumab versus platinum doublet chemotherapy as second-line therapy for advanced or recurrent endometrial cancer. Navigating the thyroid-gynecologic interplay: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1