The association between endometrial thickness and pregnancy outcome in gonadotropin-stimulated intrauterine insemination cycles
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Intrauterine insemination (IUI) is the first-line treatment for non-tubal infertility. Injectable gonadotropins are often chosen as adjunctive stimulation to promote the growth of ovarian follicles in IUI cycles. The growing follicles produce estrogen, which induces endometrial proliferation and increased endometrial stripe thickness (EST). The association between EST and pregnancy outcome in gonadotropin stimulated IUI is not well studied. The objective of this study is to determine if EST can predict pregnancy outcome in gonadotropin-stimulated IUI cycles. METHODS: A retrospective review was conducted of all exclusively gonadotropin-stimulated IUI cycles performed between 2012 and 2015 at an academic fertility clinic. Mean endometrial thickness was compared in positive versus negative cycles using Student T-test. Peak EST values were then divided into four groups of < 7 mm, 7.0-10.4 mm, 10.5-13.9 mm, and ≥ 14 mm. Multiple logistic regression analysis adjusted for potential confounders was conducted to assess the impact of peak EST on cycle outcome. RESULTS: Our sample consisted of 1065 IUI cycles representing 548 patients with a 16.9% clinical pregnancy rate and 20.5% conception rate. No significant differences in mean peak EST were observed between cycles that achieved clinical pregnancy or conception and those that did not. Division of peak EST into four groups showed a non-linear relationship between peak EST and cycle outcome, with highest rates of positive outcomes between 10.5-13.9 mm. The odds of clinical pregnancy and conception increased by 38 and 44% respectively with each subsequent peak EST category up to 10.5-13.9 mm, following which they declined. CONCLUSION: This is the largest study to date evaluating the effect of peak EST on gonadotropin-stimulated IUI cycles exclusively. The lack of significant difference in peak EST between positive and negative outcomes cycles may be due to the non-linear relationship between cycle outcomes and peak EST. Peak EST in the range of 10.5-13.9 mm was associated with significantly higher conception rates and a trend towards higher clinical pregnancy rates. This non-linearity is likely one of the reasons that EST in isolation was found to be a poor predictor of IUI outcomes, and therefore is not appropriate to be used as the sole indicator for cycle cancellation.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".