Ultrasonography as a predictor of embryo implantation after in vitro fertilization: A controlled study

Fertility and Sterility

Volumn 79, Issue 4, 2003, Pages 1015-1022

  Puerto, Bienvenido ^a   Creus, Montserrat ^a   Carmona, Francisco ^a   Cívico, Salvadora ^a   Vanrell, Juan A ^a   Balasch, Juan ^a,b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BARCELONA   (Spain)

^b HOSPITAL CLÍNIC   (Spain)

Author keywords

Doppler; Implantation; IVF; Ultrasonography

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CONCEPTION; CONTROLLED STUDY; DOPPLER FLOWMETRY; EMBRYO; ENDOMETRIUM; FEMALE; FEMALE INFERTILITY; FERTILIZATION IN VITRO; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; NIDATION; PREDICTION; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PROGNOSIS; TRANSVAGINAL ECHOGRAPHY; UTERUS BLOOD FLOW;

EID: 0037381410     PISSN: 00150282     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0015-0282(02)04854-9     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Assisted reproductive technology in the United States Results generated from the American Society for Reproductive Medicine/Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Registry . Fertil Steril. 72:2000;641-654.
2. Assisted reproductive technology in Europe, 1998. Results generated from European registers by ESHRE. Hum Reprod. 16:2001;2459-2471.
3. Schwartz L.B., Chiu A.S., Courtney M., Krey L., Schmidt-Sarosi C. The embryo versus endometrium controversy revisited as it relates to predicting pregnancy outcome in in-vitro fertilization-embryo transfer cycles. Hum Reprod. 12:1997;45-50.
4. Yaron Y., Botchan A., Amit A., Peyser M.R., David M.P., Lessing J.B. Endometrial receptivity in the light of modern assisted reproductive technologies. Fertil Steril. 62:1994;225-232.
5. Friedler S., Schenker J.G., Herman A., Lewin A. The role of ultrasonography in the evaluation of endometrial receptivity following assisted reproductive treatments a critical review . Hum Reprod Update. 2:1996;323-335.
6. Coutifaris C., Omigbodun A., Coukos G. Integrins, endometrial maturation, and human embryo implantation. Semin Reprod Endocrinol. 16:1998;219-229.
7. Creus M., Balasch J., Ordi J., Fàbregues F., Casamitjana R., Quintò L., et al. Integrin expression in normal and out-of-phase endometria. Hum Reprod. 13:1998;3460-3468.
8. Bagchi I.C., Kumar S. Steroid-regulated molecular markers of implantation. Semin Reprod Endocrinol. 17:1999;235-240.
9. Dickey R.P. Doppler ultrasound investigation of uterine and ovarian blood flow in infertility and early pregnancy. Hum Reprod Update. 3:1997;467-503.
10. Damon V.B., Bessai K., Gregor J. Using ultrasound imaging in implantation. Zentralbl Gynakol. 123:2001;340-343.
11. Fanchin R. Assessing uterine receptivity in 2001 ultrasonographic glances at the new millennium . Ann NY Acad Sci. 943:2001;185-202.
12. Coulam C.B., Bustillo M., Soenksen D.M., Britten S. Ultrasonographic predictors of implantation after assisted reproduction. Fertil Steril. 62:1994;1004-1010.
13. Tekay A., Martikainen H., Jouppila P. The clinical value of Doppler ultrasound. The clinical value of transvaginal colour Doppler ultrasound in assisted reproductive technology procedures. Hum Reprod. 11:1996;1589-1591.
14. Balasch J., Vidal E., Peñarrubia J., Casamitjana R., Carmona F., Creus M., et al. Suppression of LH during ovarian stimulation analysing threshold values and effects on ovarian response and the outcome of assisted reproduction in down-regulated women stimulated with recombinant FSH . Hum Reprod. 16:2001;1636-1643.
15. Veeck L. The morphological assessment of human oocytes and early concepti. Keel B.A., Webster B.W. Handbook of the laboratory diagnosis and treatment of infertility. 1990;353-369 CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
16. Gonen Y., Casper R.F. Prediction of implantation by the sonographic appearance of the endometrium during controlled ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization (IVF). J In Vitro Fert Embryo Transfer. 7:1990;146-152.
17. Tekay A., Martikainen H., Jouppila P. Comparison of uterine blood flow characteristics between spontaneous and stimulated cycles before embryo transfer. Hum Reprod. 11:1996;364-368.
18. Templeton A., Morris J.K. Reducing the risk of multiple births by transfer of two embryos after in vitro fertilization. N Engl J Med. 339:1998;573-577.
19. Schieve L.A., Peterson H.B., Meikle S.F., Jeng G., Danel I., Burnett N.M., et al. Live-birth rates and multiple-birth risk using in vitro fertilization. JAMA. 282:1999;1832-1838.
20. Wentz A.C. Luteal phase inadequacy. Berhman S.J., Kistner R.W., Patton G.W. Progress in infertility. 3rd ed: 1988;405-462 Little, Brown and Co, Boston.
21. Klentzeris L.D. The role of endometrium in implantation. Hum Reprod. 12:(Suppl):1997;170-175.
22. Balasch J., Vanrell J.A., Màrquez M., Gonzàlez-Merlo J. Endometrial biopsy inadvertently taken in the cycle of conception. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 22:1984;95-99.
23. Abate V., De Corato R., Cali A., Stinchi A. Endometrial biopsy at the time of embryo transfer correlation of histological diagnosis with therapy and pregnancy rate . J In Vitro Fert Embryo Transf. 4:1987;173-176.
24. Kolb B.A., Paulson R.J. The luteal phase of cycles utilizing controlled hyperstimulation and the possible impact of this hyperstimulation on embryo implantation. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 176:1997;1261-1269.
25. Remohí J., Ardiles G., García-Velasco J.A., Gaitan P., Simòn C., Pelllicer A. Endometrial thickness and serum oestradiol concentrations as predictors of outcome in oocyte donation. Hum Reprod. 12:1997;2271-2276.
26. Sundström P. Establishment of a successful pregnancy following in-vitro fertilization with an endometrial thickness of no more than 4 mm. Hum Reprod. 13:1998;1550-1552.
27. Rogers P.A., Milne B.J., Trounson A.O. A model to show human uterine receptivity and embryo viability following ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization. J In Vitro Fert Embryo Transf. 3:1986;93-98.
28. Aplin J.D. The cell biological basis of human implantation. Baillières Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 14:2000;757-764.