4.1 Review

Embryo transfer: factors involved in optimizing the success

Journal

CURRENT OPINION IN OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Volume 17, Issue 3, Pages 289-298

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/01.gco.0000169107.08000.dd

Keywords

assisted reproduction; embryo transfer; implantation; in-vitro fertilization

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose of review Embryo transfer is arguably the most critical step in assisted reproduction. The purpose of this article is to review the different aspects of the procedure in the light of recent evidence. Recent findings Randomized trials have shown that significantly higher pregnancy rates are obtained when embryo transfer is performed under ultrasound guidance, the embryos are deposited in the middle part of the uterine cavity, an atraumatic technique is used and when low-dose aspirin is routinely administered following the procedure. Blood in the catheter and leaving the embryos inside it for more than 120 s diminish the pregnancy rate significantly. Air in the catheter, immediate removal of the catheter, performing two transfers in the same cycle, prolonged bed rest, sexual intercourse after embryo transfer or the use of sildenafil do not affect the results. Based on currently available evidence, Cochrane reviews have concluded that the live birth rate s not increased by delaying embryo transfer from day two to three or to the blastocyst stage, and that single embryo transfer leads to lower live birth rates than the transfer of two embryos. The value of a mock transfer a few days before the actual procedure has been challenged as the position of the uterus may change. The effect of holding the cervix with a volsellum, routinely administering antibiotics and the superiority of one catheter over the others is still to be determined. Summary Recent studies confirm the importance of the various aspects of embryo transfer. More randomized studies are needed to further evaluate them.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available