Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics
Published in: Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 5/2020

01-05-2020 | Infertility | Assisted Reproduction Technologies

Twenty-one year experience with intrauterine inseminations after controlled ovarian stimulation with gonadotropins: maternal age is the only prognostic factor for success

Authors: Valentina Immediata, Pasquale Patrizio, Maria Rosaria Parisen Toldin, Emanuela Morenghi, Camilla Ronchetti, Federico Cirillo, Annamaria Baggiani, Elena Albani, Paolo Emanuele Levi-Setti

Published in: Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics | Issue 5/2020

Login to get access

Abstract

Purpose

To report our experience on homologous intrauterine insemination (IUI) with gonadotropin controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) cycles and to examine different variables which could predict IUI success.

Materials and methods

This is a retrospective analysis of IUIs performed between January 1997 and December 2017. A total of 7359 COS IUI’s procedures (2901 couples) were reviewed. Clinical pregnancy, live birth rate and age, body mass index (BMI), smoking habit, duration of infertility, sperm characteristics before and after treatment (total motile count, morphology, and vitality), day 3 FSH, total gonadotropin dose, and number of follicles were assessed by multivariate logistic regression analysis, and data were expressed as odds ratio (OR).

Results

The mean female age at the time of COS was 35.10 ± 3.93 years. The most common single infertility diagnoses were unexplained infertility (53.55%), mild male factor (19.69%), and anovulation (10.95%). The total progressive motile sperm count (TPMC) was > 1 × 106/ml (mean 1.34 ± 1.08 × 106/ml). The clinical pregnancy rate was 9.38%, and the live birth rate was 7.19% per cycle. Twin pregnancies were 12.17%. Cumulative pregnancy was 21.89% and cumulative live birth rate was 17.58% per couple. Clinical pregnancy and live birth rates were significantly associated with female age [OR 0.97 (95% CI 0.95–0.99) and 0.95 (95% CI 0.93–0.97), respectively] and day 3 FSH [OR 0.91 (95% CI 0.87–0.94) e 0.90 (95% CI 0.87–0.94), respectively].

Conclusions

Clinical pregnancy rate and live birth rates after COS-IUIs were significantly influenced by female age and FSH levels.

Trial registration

Clinical trial registration number: NCT03836118
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Templeton A. Infertility-epidemiology, aetiology and effective management. Health Bull (Edinb). 1995;53:294–8.
2.
World Health Organization (WHO). Infertility is a Global Public Health Issue. In: Sexual and Reproductive Health; 2014.
3.
Ombelet W. The revival of intrauterine insemination: evidence-based data have changed the picture. Facts Views Vis Obgyn. 2017;9:131–2.PubMed
4.
Cohlen B, Bijkerk A, Van der Poel S, Ombelet W. IUI: review and systematic assessment of the evidence that supports global recommendations. Hum Reprod Update. 2018;24:300–19.CrossRefPubMed
5.
6.
7.
Bhattacharya S, Harrild K, Mollison J, Wordsworth S, Tay C, Harrold A, et al. Clomifene citrate or unstimulated intrauterine insemination compared with expectant management for unexplained infertility: pragmatic randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2008;337:a716.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
8.
Reindollar RH, Regan MM, Neumann PJ, Levine BS, Thornton KL, Alper MM, et al. A randomized clinical trial to evaluate optimal treatment for unexplained infertility: the fast track and standard treatment (FASTT) trial. Fertil Steril. 2010;94:888–99.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Wordsworth S, Buchanan J, Mollison J, Harrild K, Robertson L, Tay C, et al. Clomifene citrate and intrauterine insemination as first-line treatments for unexplained infertility: are they cost-effective? Hum Reprod. 2011;26:369–75.CrossRefPubMed
10.
Farquhar CM, Liu E, Armstrong S, Arroll N, Lensen S, Brown J. Intrauterine insemination with ovarian stimulation versus expectant management for unexplained infertility (TUI): a pragmatic, open-label, randomised, controlled, two-Centre trial. Lancet. 2018;391:441–50.CrossRefPubMed
11.
Nandi A, El-Toukhy T. Stimulated intrauterine insemination for unexplained subfertility. Lancet. 2018;391:404–5.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Bensdorp AJ, Tjon-Kon-Fat RI, Bossuyt PM, Koks CA, Oosterhuis GJ, Hoek A, et al. Prevention of multiple pregnancies in couples with unexplained or mild male subfertility: randomised controlled trial of in vitro fertilisation with single embryo transfer or in vitro fertilisation in modified natural cycle compared with intrauterine insemination with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation. BMJ. 2015;350:g7771.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
13.
Tjon-Kon-Fat RI, Bensdorp AJ, Bossuyt PM, Koks C, Oosterhuis GJ, Hoek A, et al. Is IVF-served two different ways-more cost-effective than IUI with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation? Hum Reprod. 2015;30:2331–9.CrossRefPubMed
14.
Luco SM, Agbo C, Behr B, Dahan MH. The evaluation of pre and post processing semen analysis parameters at the time of intrauterine insemination in couples diagnosed with male factor infertility and pregnancy rates based on stimulation agent. A retrospective cohort study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2014;179:159–62.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
15.
Dinelli L, Courbière B, Achard V, Jouve E, Deveze C, Gnisci A, et al. Prognosis factors of pregnancy after intrauterine insemination with the husband's sperm: conclusions of an analysis of 2,019 cycles. Fertil Steril. 2014;101:994–1000.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Zegers-Hochschild F, Adamson GD, de Mouzon J, Ishihara O, Mansour R, Nygren K, et al. International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technology (ICMART) and the World Health Organization (WHO) revised glossary of ART terminology, 2009. Fertil Steril. 2009;92:1520–4.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Zegers-Hochschild F, Adamson GD, Dyer S, Racowsky C, de Mouzon J, Sokol R, et al. The international glossary on infertility and fertility care, 2017. Fertil Steril. 2017;108:393–406.CrossRefPubMed
18.
Duran HE, Morshedi M, Kruger T, Oehninger S. Intrauterine insemination: a systematic review on determinants of success. Hum Reprod Update. 2002;8:373–84.CrossRefPubMed
19.
Istituto Superiore di Sanità (ISS). Italian assisted reproductive technology national summer report. In: Monitoring the activity and outcomes of Italian ART centers in 2016: Italian national registry of Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ART); 2016.
20.
Campana A, Sakkas D, Stalberg A, Bianchi PG, Comte I, Pache T, et al. Intrauterine insemination: evaluation of the results according to the woman's age, sperm quality, total sperm count per insemination and life table analysis. Hum Reprod. 1996;11:732–6.CrossRefPubMed
21.
Thijssen A, Creemers A, Van der Elst W, Creemers E, Vandormael E, Dhont N, et al. Predictive value of different covariates influencing pregnancy rate following intrauterine insemination with homologous semen: a prospective cohort study. Reprod BioMed Online. 2017;34:463–72.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Wiser A, Shalom-Paz E, Reinblatt SL, Son WY, Das M, Tulandi T, et al. Ovarian stimulation and intrauterine insemination in women aged 40 years or more. Reprod BioMed Online. 2012;24:170–3.CrossRefPubMed
23.
Merviel P, Heraud MH, Grenier N, Lourdel E, Sanguinet P, Copin H. Predictive factors for pregnancy after intrauterine insemination (IUI): an analysis of 1038 cycles and a review of the literature. Fertil Steril. 2010;93:79–88.CrossRefPubMed
24.
C M, N V, M S, G SR. Day 2 follicles stimulating hormone (FSH) and estradiol (E2): could these values be used as markers to predict pregnancy outcomes in women undergoing ovulation induction (OI) therapy with intrauterine insemination (IUI) cycles? Fertil Steril. 2005;84(Suppl):S162.
25.
Soria M, Pradillo G, García J, Ramón P, Castillo A, Jordana C, et al. Pregnancy predictors after intrauterine insemination: analysis of 3012 cycles in 1201 couples. J Reprod Infertil. 2012;13:158–66.PubMedPubMedCentral
26.
Collins JA, Burrows EA, Wilan AR. The prognosis for live birth among untreated infertile couples. Fertil Steril. 1995;64:22–8.CrossRefPubMed
27.
Snick HK, Snick TS, Evers JL, Collins JA. The spontaneous pregnancy prognosis in untreated subfertile couples: the Walcheren primary care study. Hum Reprod. 1997;12:1582–8.CrossRefPubMed
28.
Nuojua-Huttunen S, Tomas C, Bloigu R, Tuomivaara L, Martikainen H. Intrauterine insemination treatment in subfertility: an analysis of factors affecting outcome. Hum Reprod. 1999;14:698–703.CrossRefPubMed
29.
Goverde AJ, McDonnell J, Vermeiden JP, Schats R, Rutten FF, Schoemaker J. Intrauterine insemination or in-vitro fertilisation in idiopathic subfertility and male subfertility: a randomised trial and cost-effectiveness analysis. Lancet. 2000;355:13–8.CrossRefPubMed
30.
Merviel P, Cabry R, Lourdel E, Barbier F, Scheffler F, Mansouri N, et al. Intrauterine insemination. Rev Prat. 2014;64:87–91.PubMed
31.
Cabry-Goubet R, Scheffler F, Belhadri-Mansouri N, Belloc S, Lourdel E, Devaux A, et al. Effect of gonadotropin types and indications on homologous intrauterine insemination success: a study from 1251 cycles and a review of the literature. Biomed Res Int. 2017;2017:3512784.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
32.
Vlahos NF, Coker L, Lawler C, Zhao Y, Bankowski B, Wallach EE. Women with ovulatory dysfunction undergoing ovarian stimulation with clomiphene citrate for intrauterine insemination may benefit from administration of human chorionic gonadotropin. Fertil Steril. 2005;83:1510–6.CrossRefPubMed
33.
van Weert JM, Repping S, Van Voorhis BJ, van der Veen F, Bossuyt PM, Mol BW. Performance of the postwash total motile sperm count as a predictor of pregnancy at the time of intrauterine insemination: a meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2004;82:612–20.CrossRefPubMed
34.
Mankus EB, Holden AE, Seeker PM, Kampschmidt JC, McLaughlin JE, Schenken RS, et al. Prewash total motile count is a poor predictor of live birth in intrauterine insemination cycles. Fertil Steril. 2019;111:708–13.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
35.
Pereira N. Total motile count as predictor of live birth in intrauterine insemination cycles. Fertil Steril. 2019;111:674.CrossRefPubMed
36.
Metadata
Title
Twenty-one year experience with intrauterine inseminations after controlled ovarian stimulation with gonadotropins: maternal age is the only prognostic factor for success
Authors
Valentina Immediata
Pasquale Patrizio
Maria Rosaria Parisen Toldin
Emanuela Morenghi
Camilla Ronchetti
Federico Cirillo
Annamaria Baggiani
Elena Albani
Paolo Emanuele Levi-Setti
Publication date
01-05-2020
Publisher
Springer US
Published in
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics / Issue 5/2020
Print ISSN: 1058-0468
Electronic ISSN: 1573-7330
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-020-01752-3

Other articles of this Issue 5/2020

Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 5/2020 Go to the issue

Correction

Correction to: Early pregnancy loss: the default outcome for fertilized human oocytes

Letter to Editor

Fertility preservation strategies in borderline ovarian tumor recurrences: different sides of the same coin

Letter to Editor

Maternal identity for Orthodox Jewish couples using donor oocytes or surrogacy is not well established

Assisted Reproduction Technologies

Natural frozen embryo transfer with hCG booster leads to improved cycle outcomes: a retrospective cohort study

Review

Early pregnancy loss: the default outcome for fertilized human oocytes

Fertility Preservation

Impaired reproductive function and fertility preservation in a woman with a dyskeratosis congenita