The effect of endometrial thickness and pattern measured by ultrasonography on pregnancy outcomes during IVF-ET cycles

Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology

Yanping Li¹  Qiong Zhang¹  Jing Zhao¹ 

[1] Reproductive Medicine Center, Xiangya Hospital, Central South University, Changsha, Hunan, China

关键词: Pregnancy;    Implantation;    IVF-ET;    Endometrial pattern;    Endometrial thickness;   

Others  :  1149716
DOI  :  10.1186/1477-7827-10-100

 received in 2012-08-17, accepted in 2012-11-27,  发布年份 2012

【 摘 要 】

Background

To study the effect of endometrial thickness and pattern measured using ultrasound upon pregnancy outcomes in patients undergoing IVF-ET.

Method

One thousand nine hundred thirty-three women undergoing IVF treatment participated in the study. We assessed and recorded endometrial patterns and thickness on the day of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) administration. Receiver operator curves (ROC) were used to determine the predictive accuracy of endometrial thickness. Cycles were divided into 3 groups depending on the thickness (group 1: ≤ 7 mm; group 2: > 7 mm to ≤ 14 mm; group 3: > 14 mm). Each group was subdivided into three groups according to the endometrial pattern as follows: pattern A (a triple-line pattern consisting of a central hyperechoic line surround by two hypoechoic layers); pattern B (an intermediate isoechogenic pattern with the same reflectivity as the surrounding myometrium and a poorly defined central echogenic line); and pattern C (homogenous, hyperechogenic endometrium). Clinical outcomes such as implantation and clinical pregnancy rates were analyzed.

Results

The endometrial thickness predicts pregnancy outcome with high sensitivity and specificity. The cutoff value was 9 mm. The implantation rate and clinical pregnancy rate in group 3 were 39.1% and 63.5%, respectively, which were significantly higher than those in group 2 (33.8% and 52.1%, respectively) and group 1 (13% and 25.5%, respectively). Among those with Pattern A, the implantation rate and clinical pregnancy rate were 35.3% and 55.2%, respectively, which were significantly higher than among women with Pattern B (32.1% and 50.9%, respectively) and Pattern C (23.4% and 37.4%, respectively). In groups 1 and 3, clinical pregnancy and implantation rates did not show any significant differences between different endometrial patterns (P > 0.05), whereas in group 2, the clinical pregnancy rate and implantation rate in women with pattern A were significantly higher than those with pattern B or C (P < 0.05).

Conclusions

Endometrial thickness and pattern independently affect pregnant outcomes. Combined endometrial thickness and pattern could not predict the outcome of IVF-ET when endometrial thickness was < 7 mm or >14 mm, while a triple-line pattern with a moderate endometrial thickness appeared to be associated with a good clinical outcome.

【 授权许可】

   
2012 Zhao et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Barker MA, Boehnlein LM, Kovacs P, Lindheim SR: Follicular and luteal phase endometrial thickness and echogenic pattern and pregnancy outcome in oocyte donation cycles. J Assist Reprod Genet 2009, 26:243-249.
• [2]McWilliams GD, Frattarelli JL: Changes in measured endometrial thickness predict in vitro fertilization success. Fertil Steril 2007, 88:74-81.
• [3]Amir W, Micha B, Ariel H, Liat LG, Jehoshua D, Adrian S: Predicting factors for endometrial thickness during treatment with assisted reproductive technology. Fertil Steril 2007, 87:799-804.
• [4]Richter KS, Bugge KR, Bromer JG, Levy MJ: Relationship between endometrial thickness and embryo implantation, based on 1,294 cycles of in vitro fertilization with transfer of two blastocyst-stage embryos. Fertil Steril 2007, 87:53-59.
• [5]Zhang XQ, Chen CH, Confino E, Barnes R, Milad M, Kazer RR: Increased endometrial thickness is associated with improved treatment outcome for selected patients undergoing in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer. Fertil Steril 2005, 83:336-340.
• [6]Zenke U, Chetkowski RJ: Transfer and uterine factors are the major recipient-related determinants of success with donor eggs. Fertil Steril 2004, 82:850-856.
• [7]Kovacs P, Matyas S, Boda K, Kaali SG: The effect of endometrial thickness on IVF/ICSI outcome. Hum Reprod 2003, 18:2337-2341.
• [8]Noyes N, Hampton BS, Berkeley A, Licciardi F, Grifo J, Krey L: Factors useful in predicting the success of oocyte donation: a 3-year retrospective analysis. Fertil Steril 2001, 76:92-97.
• [9]Gonen Y, Casper RF, Jacobson W, Blankier J: Endometrial thickness and growth during ovarian stimulation: A possible predictor of implantation in in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 1989, 52:446-450.
• [10]Gonen Y, Casper RF: 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 1990, 7:146-152.
• [11]Rashidi BH, Sadeghi M, Jafarabadi M, Tehrani Nejad ES: Relationships between pregnancy rates following in vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection and endometrial thickness and pattern. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2005, 120:179-184.
• [12]Schild RL, Knobloch C, Dorn C, Fimmers R, Van der Ven H, Hansmann M: Endometrial receptivity in an in vitro fertilization program as assessed by spiral artery blood flow, endometrial thickness, endometrial volume, and uterine artery blood flow. Fertil Steril 2001, 75:361-366.
• [13]Laasch C, Puscheck E: Cumulative embryo score, not endometrial thickness, is best for pregnancy prediction in IVF. J Assist Reprod Genet 2004, 21:47-50.
• [14]Garcia-Velasco JA, Isaza V, Caligara C, Pellicer A, Remohi J, Simon C: Factors that determine discordant outcome from shared oocytes. Fertil Steril 2003, 80:54-60.
• [15]Dietterich C, Check JH, Choe JK, Nazari A, Lurie D: Increased endometrial thickness on the day of human chorionic gonadotropin injection does not adversely affect pregnancy or implantation rates following in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer. Fertil Steril 2002, 77:781-786.
• [16]Yuval Y, Lipitz S, Dor J, Achiron R: The relationship between endometrial thickness, and blood flow and pregnancy rates in in-vitro fertilization. Hum Reprod 1999, 14:1067-1071.
• [17]Sundstrom P: Establishment of a successful pregnancy following in-vitro fertilization with an endometrial thickness of on more than 4 mm. Hum Reprod 1998, 13:1550-1552.
• [18]Chen SL, Wu FR, Luo C, Chen X, Shi XY, Zheng HY: Combined analysis of endometrial thickness and pattern in predicting outcome of in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer: a retrospective cohort study. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2010, 8:30. BioMed Central Full Text
• [19]Traub ML, Arsdale AV, Pal L, Jindal S, Santoro N: Endometrial thickness, Caucasian ethnicity, and age predict clinical pregnancy following fresh blastocyst embryo transfer: a retrospective cohort. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2009, 7:33-40. BioMed Central Full Text
• [20]Detti L, Yelian FD, Kruger ML, Diamond MP, Rode A, Mitwally MFM: Endometrial thickness is related to miscarriage rate, but not the estradiol concentration, in cycles down-regulated with gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist. Fertil Steril 2008, 89:998-1001.
• [21]Casper RF: It’s time to pay attention to the endometrium. Fertil Steril 2011, 96:519-521.
• [22]Weissman A, Gotlieb L, Casper RF: The detrimental effect of increased endometrial thickness on implantation and pregnancy rates and outcome in an in vitro fertilization program. Fertil Steril 1999, 71:147-149.
• [23]Ai-Ghamdi A, Coskun S, AL-Rejjal R, Awartani K: The correlation between endometrial thickness and outcome of in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF-ET) outcome. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2008, 6:37. BioMed Central Full Text
• [24]Quintero RB, Sharara FI, Milki AA: Successful pregnancies in the setting of exaggerated endometrial thickness. Fertil Steril 2004, 82:215-217.
• [25]Jarvela IY, Sladkevicius P, Kelly S, Ojha K, Campbell S, Narqund G: Evaluation of endometrial receptivity during in-vitro fertilization using three-dimensional power Doppler ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2005, 26:765-769.
• [26]Check JH, Lurie D, Dietterich C, Callan C, Baker A: Adverse effect of a homogeneous hyperechogenic endometrial sonographic pattern, despite adequate endometrial thickness on pregnancy rates following in-vitro fertilization. Hum Reprod 1993, 8:1293-1296.
• [27]Gonen Y, Calderon I, Dirnfeld M, Abramovici H: The impact of sonographic assessment of the endometrium and meticulous hormonal monitoring during natural cycles in patients with failed donor artificial insemination. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1991, 1:122-126.
• [28]Merce LT, Barco MJ, Bau S, Troyano J: Are endometrial parameters by three-dimensional ultrasound and power Doppler angiography related to in vitro fertilization/embryo transfer outcome? Fertil Steril 2008, 89:111-117.
• [29]Nahari CP, Catherno WH, Mckeeby JL, Wesley R, Segars JH: A suboptimal endometrial pattern is associated with a reduced likelihood of pregnancy after a day 5 embryo transfer. Fertil Steril 2005, 83:235-237.
• [30]Detti L, Saed GM, Fletcher NM, Kruger M, Brossoit M, Diamond MP: Endometrial morphology and modulation of hormone receptors during ovarian stimulation for assisted reproductive technology cycles. Fertil Steril 2011, 95:1073-1081.
• [31]Friedler S, Schenker JG, Herman A, Lewin A: The role of ultrasonography in the evaluation of endometrial receptivity following assisted reproductive treatments: A critical review. Hum Reprod Update 1996, 2:323-325.
• [32]Puerto B, Creus M, Carmona F, Civico S, Vanrell JA, Balasch J: Ultrasonography as a predictor of embryo implantation after in vitro fertilization: a controlled study. Fertil Steril 2003, 79:1015-1022.
• [33]Child TJ, Gulekli B, Sylvestre C, Tan SL: Ultrasonographic assessment of endometrial receptivity at embryo transfer in an vitro maturation of oocyte program. Fertil Steril 2003, 79:656-658.