Effect of delayed versus immediate embryo transfer catheter removal on pregnancy outcomes during fresh cycles

Sroga, Julie M.; Montville, Christopher P.; Aubuchon, Mira; Williams, Daniel B.; Thomas, Michael A.

doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.07.1664

Cited by 16 publications

(13 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Our findings confirm previous study results [9,10] . However, the present study should be considered superior, in terms of its prospective design, patient randomization, and relatively higher number of included patients, than the previous ones, which were either smaller in sample size [9] or retrospectively designed [10] .…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 94%

“…Martínez et al [9] investigated the effects of time interval before withdrawal of the ET catheter in their prospective randomized study with a total of 100 women and demonstrated that there were no significant difference between immediate withdrawal (pregnancy rate 60.8%) and delayed withdrawal (pregnancy rate 69.4%) in terms of pregnancy rates. Similarly, Sroga et al [10] compared clinical pregnancy rates retrospectively between women undergoing immediate or delayed catheter removal after ET and reported that no difference was noted between the 2 techniques. However, in a subgroup undergoing both ET techniques, a significant increase in the ongoing pregnancy rate was reported in patients who had a delayed transfer after a failed immediate transfer over those patients who had an immediate transfer following a failed delayed transfer [10] .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Similarly, Sroga et al [10] compared clinical pregnancy rates retrospectively between women undergoing immediate or delayed catheter removal after ET and reported that no difference was noted between the 2 techniques. However, in a subgroup undergoing both ET techniques, a significant increase in the ongoing pregnancy rate was reported in patients who had a delayed transfer after a failed immediate transfer over those patients who had an immediate transfer following a failed delayed transfer [10] .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Even though immediate removal of the transfer catheter from the uterine cavity may theoretically initiate uterine contractility and, hereby, engender the expulsion of embryos transferred, it has not been clearly demonstrated whether delayed catheter removal contributes to improved fertility outcomes in ART cycles. The results of the studies investigating the timing of transfer catheter removal have remained conflicting [6][7][8][9][10] .…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

The Timing of Embryo Transfer Catheter Removal: Should It be Delayed or Done Immediately? A Prospective Randomized Trial

Devranoğlu

Özdamar

Çakıroğlu

et al. 2017

Gynecol Obstet Invest

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background/Aims: Data on the timing of catheter removal technique following embryo transfer (ET) are quite limited. We aimed to compare the reproductive outcomes of intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI)/ET cycles in which the transfer catheter was removed immediately with those in which the catheter was removed after a delay period and hereby to evaluate the impact that the time interval before removal of the catheter following embryo deposit may have on the fertility outcomes. Methods: A prospective randomized study was designed. ICSI/ET patients <40 years were randomly assigned to either of the group from which catheter was withdrawn immediately within the first 5 s (Group A) or after a 30 s delay (Group B) following ET. Results: Groups A and B consisted of 147 and 148 patients, respectively. Patient demographics and stimulation characteristics were comparable between the groups. Pregnancy rate was 32.2% (95 of 295) and clinical pregnancy rate was 28.8% (85 of 295), whereas ongoing pregnancy was 24.4% (72 of 295) and implantation rate was 29.6% (100 of 338). The comparison of reproductive outcomes revealed no significant differences in pregnancy (p = 0.933), clinical pregnancy (p = 0.673), ongoing pregnancy (p = 0.590), multiple pregnancy (p = 0.801), and implantation rates (p = 0.979) between the groups. Conclusion: No significant difference was observed in the reproductive outcomes between the groups; thus, there appears no requirement to delay the withdrawal of the catheter to improve the outcomes in ICSI cycles.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 94%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

The Timing of Embryo Transfer Catheter Removal: Should It be Delayed or Done Immediately? A Prospective Randomized Trial

Devranoğlu

Özdamar

Çakıroğlu

et al. 2017

Gynecol Obstet Invest

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…• Performing the procedure under ultrasound control (Abou-Setta et al, 2007;Buckett et al, 2003;Coroleu et al, 2000;Kan et al, 1999;Matorras et al, 2002;Sroga et al, 2010;Pope et al, 2004;Wood et al, 2000).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Embryo Transfer Catheters: Softer is Easier

Ruhlmann

Gnocchi

Cattaneo

et al. 2015

JBRA Assisted Reproduction

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: This study aimed to compare the use of semi-rigid and flexible catheters in terms of pregnancy rate and level of difficulty of the embryo transfer (ET) procedure. Methods: Seven hundred and thirty-nine consecutive follicular aspirations for IVF or ICSI performed in our private fertility clinic within a 30-month period were randomly divided into two groups. Patients were allocated to either of the groups at the time of follicular retrieval with the aid of a random number generator according to the catheter used in ET: Group 1 (n = 370) -Frydman Classic Catheter 4.5 catheters; and Group 2 (n = 369) -Frydman Ultrasoft 4.5 catheters. Only patients offered ET in the randomized cycle were included (Group 1 = 363 and Group 2 = 340). Patients did not change groups after catheter allocation. Statistical analysis was carried out using an unpaired t-test or a chi square test as appropriate. Differences with P<0.05 were considered. Results: A statistically significant difference in favor of the use of the Ultrasoft catheter was evident for parameters use of a tenaculum (19.8% vs. 5.9%) or a hysterometer (5.0% vs. 1.2%), presence of blood during post-ET inspection of the catheter (9.9% vs. 3.8%), and implantation rate (13.0% vs. 16.4%). Clinical pregnancy and delivery rates were comparable in both groups. Conclusions: Our results suggest that a softer catheter may help with difficult ETs. Softer catheters, as also reported by other authors, resulted in better implantation rates.

show abstract

Endometriosis and Infertility: Surgery and IVF: When, Why, and Outcomes

Adamyan

2020

Endometriosis Pathogenesis, Clinical Impact and Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Effect of delayed versus immediate embryo transfer catheter removal on pregnancy outcomes during fresh cycles

Cited by 16 publications

References 16 publications

The Timing of Embryo Transfer Catheter Removal: Should It be Delayed or Done Immediately? A Prospective Randomized Trial

The Timing of Embryo Transfer Catheter Removal: Should It be Delayed or Done Immediately? A Prospective Randomized Trial

Embryo Transfer Catheters: Softer is Easier

Endometriosis and Infertility: Surgery and IVF: When, Why, and Outcomes

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About