4.3 Article

The effect of anesthetic agents for oocyte pick-up on in vitro fertilization outcome: A retrospective study in a tertiary center

Journal

TAIWANESE JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Volume 58, Issue 5, Pages 673-679

Publisher

ELSEVIER TAIWAN
DOI: 10.1016/j.tjog.2019.07.016

Keywords

IVF outcome; Anesthesia; Propofol; Ketamine

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: General anesthesia is used in most in vitro fertilization (IVF) clinics for oocyte pick-up (OPU), however, there is no consensus on type of anesthetic agent use among clinicians performing OPU. Therefore, we aimed to evaluate the effects of propofol, ketamine, or combination of propofol and ketamine (P + K) for OPU on IVF outcome. Material and methods: Three hundred and thirty three women (n = 333) undergoing IVF treatment were retrospectively included and were evaluated in three groups depending on whether they received propofol (n = 217), or ketamine (n = 60), or P thorn K (n = 56) for anesthesia during OPU. Results: Baseline characteristics and duration of anesthesia of each group were comparable except lower motile sperm percentage in the ketamine group compared to the propofol group (p = 0.002). Fertilization rate (FR) was decreased with ketamine compared to propofol (p = 0.013) and P thorn K (p = 0.008). After adjustment for sperm motility, this negative effect of ketamine on FR persisted. Implantation, clinical pregnancy, take-home baby rates, and oocyte retrieval parameters (number of total retrieved oocyte, metaphase II oocytes, embryo and methaphase II rate, and embryo quality) did not differ between the groups. Extended anesthesia duration (>30 min) was associated with low implantation (p = 0.04) and clinical pregnancy rates (p = 0.02). Conclusion: Ketamine use during OPU can affect FR compared to propofol and P thorn K. Long durations of anesthesia also seem to decrease implantation and clinical pregnancy rates. (C) 2019 Taiwan Association of Obstetrics & Gynecology. Publishing services by Elsevier B.V.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.3
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available