» Articles » PMID: 21459374

Transvaginal Versus Transabdominal Ultrasound Guidance for Embryo Transfer in Donor Oocyte Recipients: a Randomized Clinical Trial

Overview
Journal Fertil Steril
Date 2011 Apr 5
PMID 21459374
Citations 10
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Objective: To compare pregnancy and implantation rates with transvaginal (TV) versus transabdominal (TA) ultrasound-guided embryo transfer (ET).

Design: Randomized, clinical trial registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT 01137461).

Setting: Private, infertility clinic.

Patient(s): Three-hundred thirty randomized recipients of donor oocytes.

Intervention(s): Embryo transfer using TV (with empty bladder, using the Kitazato ET Long catheter) versus TA ultrasound guidance (with full bladder, using the echogenic Sure View Wallace catheter).

Main Outcome Measure(s): Overall pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, implantation, and ongoing pregnancy rates. Duration and difficulty of ET. Patient-reported uterine cramping and discomfort, as evaluated by questionnaire.

Result(s): No statistically significant differences were observed in clinical pregnancy 50.9% versus 49.4% (95% confidence interval of the difference: -9.2 to +12.2%), implantation 34.5% versus 31.4% (95% CI of the difference: -4 to +10.3%) between the TV and TA ultrasound-guided groups. Transfer difficulty (6% versus 4.2%) and uterine cramping (27.2% versus 18.3%) were not statistically significantly different between treatment groups. Total duration (154±119 versus 85±76 seconds) was statistically significantly higher in the TV ultrasound group. Light to moderate-severe discomfort related to bladder distension was reported by 63% of the patients in the TA ultrasound group.

Conclusion(s): Transvaginal ultrasound-guided ET yielded similar success rates compared with the TA ultrasound-guided procedure without requiring the assistance of a sonographer. It was associated with increased patient comfort due to the absence of bladder distension.

Citing Articles

Evidence and consensus on technical aspects of embryo transfer.

DAngelo A, Panayotidis C, Alteri A, Mcheik S, Veleva Z Hum Reprod Open. 2022; 2022(4):hoac038.

PMID: 36196080 PMC: 9522404. DOI: 10.1093/hropen/hoac038.


A comparative study of transabdominal and transvaginal ultrasound guidance on consequences of embryo transfer at Mahdiyeh hospital of Tehran in 2020: An RCT.

Geran Malekkheili P, Zadehmodarres S, Heidar Z Int J Reprod Biomed. 2022; 20(3):169-176.

PMID: 35571496 PMC: 9099364. DOI: 10.18502/ijrm.v20i3.10708.


Interventions to optimize embryo transfer in women undergoing assisted conception: a comprehensive systematic review and meta-analyses.

Tyler B, Walford H, Tamblyn J, Keay S, Mavrelos D, Yasmin E Hum Reprod Update. 2022; 28(4):480-500.

PMID: 35325124 PMC: 9631462. DOI: 10.1093/humupd/dmac009.


The Role of Transvaginal Ultrasound Guided Embryo Transfer to Improve Pregnancy Rate in Obese Patients Undergoing Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection.

Mohamed Hassan S, Ramadan W, Elsharkawy M, Bayoumi Y Int J Womens Health. 2021; 13:861-867.

PMID: 34584462 PMC: 8464338. DOI: 10.2147/IJWH.S325557.


Sequential cleavage and blastocyst embryo transfer and IVF outcomes: a systematic review.

Zhang J, Wang C, Zhang H, Zhou Y Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2021; 19(1):142.

PMID: 34521412 PMC: 8439041. DOI: 10.1186/s12958-021-00824-y.