An Endometrial Receptivity Scoring System Basing on the Endometrial Thickness, Volume, Echo, Peristalsis, and Blood Flow Evaluated by Ultrasonography

Overview

Journal Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)

Specialty Endocrinology

Date 2022 Aug 26

PMID 36017318

Authors

Chun-Hui Zhang

Cheng Chen

Jia-Rui Wang

Yue Wang

Si-Xi Wen

Yan-Pei Cao

Wei-Ping Qian

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: Establishing a successful pregnancy depends on the endometrium and the embryo. It is estimated that suboptimal endometrial receptivity account for one-third of implantation failures. Despite the indepth understanding of the processes associated with embryo-endometrial cross-talk, little progress has been achieved for diagnosis and treatments for suboptimal endometrial receptivity.

Methods: This retrospective study included women undergoing their first frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) cycles at our reproductive medicine center from March 2021 to August 2021. Transvaginal three-dimensional (3D) ultrasound was performed in the morning on the day of embryo transfer for all the thawed embryo transfer patients, to evaluate endometrial receptivity, including endometrial thickness, echogenicity, volume, movement and blood flow.

Results: A total number of 562 patients of FET with 315 pregnancies (56.0%) was analyzed. It was found that only the echo of the endometrial central line was different between the pregnant group and non-pregnant group. Other parameters, such as endometrial thickness, volume, endometrial peristalsis, or the endometrial blood flow were not statistically different between the two groups. Then, according to the relationship between the different groups and the clinical pregnancy rate, a score of 0 to 2 was respectively scored. The sum of the scores for the six items was the patient's endometrial receptivity score. It showed that the clinical pregnancy rate increased as the endometrial receptivity score increased, and when the receptivity score reaches at least 5, the clinical pregnancy rate is significantly improved (63.7% versus 49.5%, =0.001).

Conclusion: We developed an endometrial receptivity scoring system and demonstrated its validity. It may aid clinicians in choosing the useful marker in clinical practice and for informing further research.

Citing Articles

Multi-modality imaging technologies and machine learning for non-invasive, precise assessment of rabbit endometrium.

Tan Z, Tian Y, Zha X, Qin Z, Xiong Q, Wang M Biomed Opt Express. 2025; 16(2):821-836.

PMID: 39958839 PMC: 11828431. DOI: 10.1364/BOE.547855.

FSH/LH co-stimulation in Advanced Maternal Age (AMA) and hypo-responder patients - Arabian gulf delphi consensus group.

Awwad J, Peramo B, Elgeyoushi B, Melado L, Salame A, Chawla M Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2024; 15:1506332.

PMID: 39726844 PMC: 11669953. DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2024.1506332.

The Combination of Super-Active Platelet Lysate and Acellular Amniotic Membrane Enhances Endometrial Receptivity, While Simultaneously Facilitating Endometrial Repair in Rats.

Wu H, Zhang Y, Liu C, Tang X, Wang L, Meng L J Inflamm Res. 2024; 17:11097-11109.

PMID: 39713713 PMC: 11662643. DOI: 10.2147/JIR.S483446.

Does Endometrial Thickness or Compaction Impact the Success of Frozen Embryo Transfer? A Cohort Study Analysis.

Aslih N, Atzmon Y, Bilgory A, Shibli Abu Raya Y, Sharqawi M, Shalom-Paz E J Clin Med. 2024; 13(23).

PMID: 39685713 PMC: 11641975. DOI: 10.3390/jcm13237254.

An endometrial receptivity scoring system evaluated by ultrasonography in patients undergoing frozen-thawed embryo transfer: a prospective cohort study.

Ouyang Y, Peng Y, Mao Y, Zheng M, Gong F, Li Y Front Med (Lausanne). 2024; 11:1354363.

PMID: 38576706 PMC: 10991689. DOI: 10.3389/fmed.2024.1354363.

References

Silva Martins R, Helio Oliani A, Vaz Oliani D, Martinez de Oliveira J . Subendometrial resistence and pulsatility index assessment of endometrial receptivity in assisted reproductive technology cycles. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2019; 17(1):62. PMC: 6676512. DOI: 10.1186/s12958-019-0507-6. View

Liu K, Hartman M, Hartman A, Luo Z, Mahutte N . The impact of a thin endometrial lining on fresh and frozen-thaw IVF outcomes: an analysis of over 40 000 embryo transfers. Hum Reprod. 2018; 33(10):1883-1888. PMC: 6145412. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dey281. View

Babayev E, Matevossian K, Hensley C, Zhang J, Bulun S . Baseline Endometrial Thickness or Endometrial Thickness Change in Response to Estrogen Is Not Predictive of Frozen Embryo Transfer Success in Medicated Cycles. Reprod Sci. 2020; 27(12):2242-2246. DOI: 10.1007/s43032-020-00233-3. View

Ijland M, Evers J, DUNSELMAN G, Volovics L, Hoogland H . Relation between endometrial wavelike activity and fecundability in spontaneous cycles. Fertil Steril. 1997; 67(3):492-6. DOI: 10.1016/s0015-0282(97)80075-1. View

Gao G, Cui X, Li S, Ding P, Zhang S, Zhang Y . Endometrial thickness and IVF cycle outcomes: a meta-analysis. Reprod Biomed Online. 2019; 40(1):124-133. DOI: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2019.09.005. View

Makrigiannakis A, Makrygiannakis F, Vrekoussis T . Approaches to Improve Endometrial Receptivity in Case of Repeated Implantation Failures. Front Cell Dev Biol. 2021; 9:613277. PMC: 8007915. DOI: 10.3389/fcell.2021.613277. View

Elsokkary M, Eldin A, Abdelhafez M, Rateb A, Samy M, Eldorf A . The reproducibility of the novel utilization of five-dimensional ultrasound and power Doppler in the prediction of endometrial receptivity in intracytoplasmic sperm-injected women: a pilot prospective clinical study. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2018; 299(2):551-558. DOI: 10.1007/s00404-018-5001-4. View

Chung C, Wong A, Chan C, Saravelos S, Kong G, Cheung L . The changing pattern of uterine contractions before and after fresh embryo transfer and its relation to clinical outcome. Reprod Biomed Online. 2017; 34(3):240-247. DOI: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2016.12.011. View

Ruiz-Alonso M, Blesa D, Diaz-Gimeno P, Gomez E, Fernandez-Sanchez M, Carranza F . The endometrial receptivity array for diagnosis and personalized embryo transfer as a treatment for patients with repeated implantation failure. Fertil Steril. 2013; 100(3):818-24. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.05.004. View

10.

Baruffi R, Contart P, Mauri A, Petersen C, Felipe V, Garbellini E . A uterine ultrasonographic scoring system as a method for the prognosis of embryo implantation. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2002; 19(3):99-102. PMC: 3468263. DOI: 10.1023/a:1014795502401. View

11.

Applebaum M . The uterine biophysical profile. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 1995; 5(1):67-8. DOI: 10.1046/j.1469-0705.1995.05010067.x. View

12.

Crha I, Ventruba P, Zakova J, Jeseta M, Pilka R, Lousova E . Uterine microbiome and endometrial receptivity. Ceska Gynekol. 2019; 84(1):49-54. View

13.

Mishra V, Agarwal R, Sharma U, Aggarwal R, Choudhary S, Bandwal P . Endometrial and Subendometrial Vascularity by Three-Dimensional (3D) Power Doppler and Its Correlation with Pregnancy Outcome in Frozen Embryo Transfer (FET) Cycles. J Obstet Gynaecol India. 2016; 66(Suppl 1):521-7. PMC: 5016461. DOI: 10.1007/s13224-016-0871-5. View

14.

Maged A, Kamel A, Abu-Hamila F, Elkomy R, Ohida O, Hassan S . The measurement of endometrial volume and sub-endometrial vascularity to replace the traditional endometrial thickness as predictors of fertilization success. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2019; 35(11):949-954. DOI: 10.1080/09513590.2019.1604660. View

15.

Shakerian B, Turkgeldi E, Yildiz S, Keles I, Ata B . Endometrial thickness is not predictive for live birth after embryo transfer, even without a cutoff. Fertil Steril. 2021; 116(1):130-137. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2021.02.041. View

16.

Rock J, Bartlett M . Biopsy studies of human endometrium: criteria of dating and information about amenorrhea, menorrhagia, and time of ovulation. J Am Med Assoc. 1937; 108(24):2022-8. DOI: 10.1001/jama.1937.02780240014006. View

17.

Diaz-Gimeno P, Horcajadas J, Martinez-Conejero J, Esteban F, Alama P, Pellicer A . A genomic diagnostic tool for human endometrial receptivity based on the transcriptomic signature. Fertil Steril. 2010; 95(1):50-60, 60.e1-15. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.04.063. View

18.

Masrour M, Yoonesi L, Aerabsheibani H . The effect of endometrial thickness and endometrial blood flow on pregnancy outcome in intrauterine insemination cycles. J Family Med Prim Care. 2019; 8(9):2845-2849. PMC: 6820384. DOI: 10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_212_19. View

19.

Check J, Cohen R . Live fetus following embryo transfer in a woman with diminished egg reserve whose maximal endometrial thickness was less than 4 mm. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol. 2012; 38(4):330-2. View

20.

Dong Y, Cai Y, Zhang Y, Xing Y, Sun Y . The effect of fertility stress on endometrial and subendometrial blood flow among infertile women. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2017; 15(1):15. PMC: 5336671. DOI: 10.1186/s12958-017-0236-7. View