Home > DARE Reviews > A meta-analysis of ultrasound-guided...
  • We are sorry, but NCBI web applications do not support your browser and may not function properly. More information

PubMed Health. A service of the National Library of Medicine, National Institutes of Health.

Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE): Quality-assessed Reviews [Internet]. York (UK): Centre for Reviews and Dissemination (UK); 1995-.

Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE): Quality-assessed Reviews.

A meta-analysis of ultrasound-guided versus clinical touch embryo transfer

Review published: 2003.

Bibliographic details: Buckett W M.  A meta-analysis of ultrasound-guided versus clinical touch embryo transfer. Fertility and Sterility 2003; 80(4): 1037-1041. [PubMed: 14556830]

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine the relative efficacy of ultrasound-guided embryo transfer and embryo transfer by clinical touch alone.

DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized, controlled trials comparing ultrasound-guided embryo transfer with embryo transfer by clinical touch alone.

SETTING: Infertility centers providing treatment with in vitro fertilization/embryo transfer.

PATIENT(S): Women undergoing embryo transfer.

INTERVENTION(S): Embryo transfer with or without transabdominal ultrasound guidance.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Clinical pregnancy rate and embryo implantation rate.

RESULT(S): A total of eight prospective controlled trials were identified. Of these studies, four were nonrandomized or quasi-randomized and four were genuinely randomized. Meta-analysis demonstrated a significantly increased chance of clinical pregnancy following ultrasound-guided embryo transfer in all studies and in the genuinely randomized subgroup. The embryo implantation rate was also significantly increased following ultrasound-guided embryo transfer.

CONCLUSION(S): Ultrasound-guided embryo transfer significantly increases the chance of clinical pregnancy and significantly increases the embryo implantation rate.

CRD has determined that this article meets the DARE scientific quality criteria for a systematic review.

Copyright © 2012 University of York.

PubMed Health Blog...

read all...

Recent Activity

Your browsing activity is empty.

Activity recording is turned off.

Turn recording back on

See more...