4.7 Article

Endometrial receptivity in an in vitro fertilization program as assessed by spiral artery blood flow, endometrial thickness, endometrial volume, and uterine artery blood flow

Journal

FERTILITY AND STERILITY
Volume 75, Issue 2, Pages 361-366

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0015-0282(00)01695-2

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To investigate the role of sonographic parameters in assessing endometrial receptivity in an in vitro fertilization (IVF) program. Design: Prospective clinical study. Setting: University setting. Patient(s): One hundred thirty-five patients in our IVF program, selected prospectively on the day of oocyte retrieval. Intervention(s): Transvaginal ultrasound examination was performed before oocyte collection. Main Outcome Measure(s): Association between implantation rate and spiral artery blood flow (primary outcome measure) and between implantation rate and endometrial measurements as well as uterine artery blood flow (secondary outcome measures). Result(s): Overall implantation rate was 23.7% per cycle. Subendometrial blood flow was detected in 113 (83.7%) cases, with pregnancy occurring in 21.2%. Mean spiral artery pulsatility index values were 1.12 +/- 0.28 and 1.21 +/- 0.27 for nonconception and conception cycles, respectively. Nondetectable spiral artery blood flow was not associated with a lower implantation rate. Neither endometrial thickness nor endometrial volume was correlated with the likelihood of successful implantation. Minimum endometrial thickness and volume associated with pregnancy were 6.9 mm and 1.59 mL, respectively. Conclusion(s): Neither Doppler sonography of the spiral or uterine arteries nor measurement of the endometrial thickness or volume allowed a reliable prediction of subsequent IVF outcome. (Fertil Steril((R)) 2001;75: 361-6. (C)2001 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.).

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available