P-159 The role of Embryo transfer medium containing high concentrations of hyaluronic acid on IVF outcome: A systematic review and meta-analysis
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Study question Does embryo transfer medium containing high concentrations of hyaluronic acid (HA) increase In Vitro Fertilisation (IVF) success rate? Summary answer Embryo transfer medium containing high concentration of HA has increased the live birth (LBR) and clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) whilst decreasing the miscarriage rate. What is known already The recent Cochrane systematic review reported low to moderate evidence to support the use of high concentration hyaluronic acid (HA) in the treatment group. Previous studies have also shown no effect of high concentration HA on frozen embryo transfer (FET) rate and have identified the supplementation of the transfer media with HA to have no significance on adverse effect rate. Study design, size, duration A literature search was performed on three online databases: Ovid Medline, PsychInfo and Central Cochrane. 1162 citations were retrieved and after screening abstracts and titles 1099 citations were removed and a following 37 removed after screening full texts. This left 26 publications for the review. Bias was assessed for in RCTs using Cochrane collaboration tool of bias and STROBE for observational studies. Meta-analysis was performed using Review manager identifying the risk ratio (RR) and heterogeneity. Participants/materials, setting, methods In the review, 6304 participants in the treatment group and, 5965 in the control group were included. The primary outcomes was LBR and secondary outcomes were CPR; miscarriage rate; multiple pregnancy rate; ectopic pregnancy and congenital abnormalities. A subgroup analysis was performed looking into the outcome based on the stage of embryos transferred, the exposure time to the transfer medium and difference between frozen and fresh embryo transfer. Main results and the role of chance There was a significant increase in LBR (RR: 1.25; 95% CI 1.17 to 1.33) with use of high concentration HA and this positive effect was seen in both cleavage stage and blastocyst transfer cycles. CPR was also higher (RR: 1.16 (95% CI 1.10 to 1.22), while Miscarriage rate was significantly reduced (RR: 0.75; 95% CI 0.66 to 0.85) in the treatment group. Multiple pregnancy rate were higher in the study group (RR: 1.33; 95% CI: 1.16 to 1.53), although one study had a large influence on these results. The ectopic pregnancy rates (RR: 0.62; 95% CI 0.19 to 1.99) and congenital abnormalities (RR: 0.84; 95% CI 0.37 to 1.92) were similar. On subgroup analysis, the higher LBR was seen only for fresh cycles (RR: 1.2; 95% CI 1.1 to 1.3) but were similar for frozen embryo transfer (RR: 0.99; 95% CI 0.8 to 1.24). Further, LBR were higher in both short (10 minutes) and long exposure (>10 minutes) groups (RR: 1.32; 95% CI 1.19 to 1.45 and RR: 1.23; 95% CI 1.14 to 1.33 respectively. Limitations, reasons for caution The high heterogeneity across the studies may increase the risk of bias in the results. Inclusion of observational studies also has an inherent risk of selection bias. The review did not have a restrictive exclusion criterion resulting in inclusion of patients from a large demographic, limiting the specificity of results. Wider implications of the findings The data from this review support the use of embryo transfer medium containing high concentration of HA during fresh IVF cycles but not for frozen cycles. However, a large RCT is warranted particularly for selected groups like women of advanced maternal age and those with recurrent implantation failure. Trial registration number Not applicable
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,007 | 0,002 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».