scholarly journals Pregnancy Rate after Tubal Reanastomosis: A Case Presentation and Systematic Review

2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (1) ◽  
pp. 28-33
Author(s):  
Muhammad A Zucha ◽  
Muhammad Lutfi ◽  
Supak Silawani ◽  
Anastasia Feliciana ◽  
Pritania Astari
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Pregnancy Rate ◽  
Case Presentation ◽  
Tubal Reanastomosis

scholarly journals GnRH agonist and hCG (dual trigger) versus hCG trigger for follicular maturation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials

2021 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Kai-Lun Hu ◽  
Siwen Wang ◽  
Xiaohang Ye ◽  
Dan Zhang ◽  
Sarah Hunt
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Pregnancy Rate ◽  
Live Birth ◽  
Gnrh Agonist ◽  
Birth Rate ◽  
Randomized Trials ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Live Birth Rate ◽  
Follicular Maturation ◽  
Hcg Trigger

Abstract Background Traditionally, final follicular maturation is triggered by a single bolus of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG). This acts as a surrogate to the naturally occurring luteinizing hormone (LH) surge to induce luteinization of the granulosa cells, resumption of meiosis and final oocyte maturation. More recently, a bolus of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist in combination with hCG (dual trigger) has been suggested as an alternative regimen to achieve final follicular maturation. Methods This study was a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials evaluating the effect of dual trigger versus hCG trigger for follicular maturation on pregnancy outcomes in women undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF). The primary outcome was the live birth rate (LBR) per started cycle. Results A total of 1048 participants were included in the analysis, with 519 in the dual trigger group and 529 in the hCG trigger group. Dual trigger treatment was associated with a significantly higher LBR per started cycle compared with the hCG trigger treatment (risk ratio (RR) = 1.37 [1.07, 1.76], I2 = 0%, moderate evidence). There was a trend towards an increase in both ongoing pregnancy rate (RR = 1.34 [0.96, 1.89], I2 = 0%, low evidence) and implantation rate (RR = 1.31 [0.90, 1.91], I2 = 76%, low evidence) with dual trigger treatment compared with hCG trigger treatment. Dual trigger treatment was associated with a significant increase in clinical pregnancy rate (RR = 1.29 [1.10, 1.52], I2 = 13%, low evidence), number of oocytes collected (mean difference (MD) = 1.52 [0.59, 2.46), I2 = 53%, low evidence), number of mature oocytes collected (MD = 1.01 [0.43, 1.58], I2 = 18%, low evidence), number of fertilized oocytes (MD = 0.73 [0.16, 1.30], I2 = 7%, low evidence) and significantly more usable embryos (MD = 0.90 [0.42, 1.38], I2 = 0%, low evidence). Conclusion Dual trigger treatment with GnRH agonist and HCG is associated with an increased live birth rate compared with conventional hCG trigger. Trial registration CRD42020204452.

scholarly journals Sclerosing Epithelioid Fibrosarcoma: Case Presentation and a Systematic Review

2008 ◽  
Vol 466 (6) ◽  
pp. 1485-1491 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christian Ossendorf ◽  
Gabriela M. Studer ◽  
Beata Bode ◽  
Bruno Fuchs
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Case Presentation ◽  
Sclerosing Epithelioid Fibrosarcoma

scholarly journals Should home-based ovulation predictor kits be offered as an additional approach for fertility management for women and couples desiring pregnancy? A systematic review and meta-analysis

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (2) ◽  
pp. e001403 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ping Teresa Yeh ◽  
Caitlin E Kennedy ◽  
Sheryl Van der Poel ◽  
Thabo Matsaseng ◽  
Laura Bernard ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Review ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Observational Study ◽  
Pregnancy Rate ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Risk Of Bias ◽  
Time To Pregnancy ◽  
Fertility Management ◽  
Home Based ◽  
Registration Number

IntroductionTo inform the WHO Guideline on self-care interventions, we conducted a systematic review of the impact of ovulation predictor kits (OPKs) on time-to-pregnancy, pregnancy, live birth, stress/anxiety, social harms/adverse events and values/preferences.MethodsIncluded studies had to compare women desiring pregnancy who managed their fertility with and without OPKs, measure an outcome of interest and be published in a peer-reviewed journal. We searched for studies on PubMed, CINAHL, LILACS and EMBASE through November 2018. We assessed risk of bias assessed using the Cochrane tool for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and the Evidence Project tool for observational studies, and conducted meta-analysis using random effects models to generate pooled estimates of relative risk (RR).ResultsFour studies (three RCTs and one observational study) including 1487 participants, all in high-income countries, were included. Quality of evidence was low. Two RCTs found no difference in time-to-pregnancy. All studies reported pregnancy rate, with mixed results: one RCT from the 1990s among couples with unexplained or male-factor infertility found no difference in clinical pregnancy rate (RR: 1.09, 95% CI 0.51 to 2.32); two more recent RCTs found higher self-reported pregnancy rates among OPK users (pooled RR: 1.40, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.80). A small observational study found higher rates of pregnancy with lab testing versus OPKs among women using donor insemination services. One RCT found no increase in stress/anxiety after two menstrual cycles using OPKs, besides a decline in positive affect. No studies measured live birth or social harms/adverse events. Six studies presented end-users’ values/preferences, with almost all women reporting feeling satisfied, comfortable and confident using OPKs.ConclusionA small evidence base, from high-income countries and with high risk of bias, suggests that home-based use of OPKs may improve fertility management when attempting to become pregnant with no meaningful increase in stress/anxiety and with high user acceptability.Systematic review registration numberPROSPERO registration number CRD42019119402.

Early survival following in utero myocardial infarction

2018 ◽  
Vol 28 (10) ◽  
pp. 1079-1087
Author(s):  
Peter Cosgrove ◽  
Shan Modi ◽  
Karla Lawson ◽  
Camille Hancock-Friesen ◽  
Gregory Johnson
Keyword(s):  
Myocardial Infarction ◽  
Systematic Review ◽  
Case Reports ◽  
Current Data ◽  
Treatment Modalities ◽  
Case Presentation ◽  
Coronary Imaging ◽  
Prisma Statement ◽  
Short Term Mortality ◽  
Low Threshold

AbstractIntrauterine myocardial infarction is a rare and frequently fatal diagnosis. It has been presented in the literature only as case reports and short series. We present a case report of a coronary occlusive intrauterine myocardial infarction and survival and present a systematic review of the literature. This is the first summative description of current data on intrauterine and perinatal myocardial infarction. We performed the systematic review based on the guidelines established by the PRISMA statement. Our population of intrauterine and perinatal myocardial infarction included published cases who presented as a live birth within the first 28 postnatal days, and had a diagnosis of myocardial infarction. We conducted descriptive statistics and regression analysis on short-term mortality as the primary outcome. After applying exclusion criteria we described 84 individual cases of myocardial infarction from 63 full-text articles including our own case. Presentation within the first 12 hours was associated with mortality (OR 3.90, p=0.004). Treatment modalities were varied and inconsistently recorded. The aetiologies and comorbidities are varied in our systematic review. We would have a low threshold to perform viral testing, consider anticoagulation early and coronary imaging if feasible. The use of extracorporeal membranous oxygenation may serve as a bridge to cardiac recovery.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document