Skip Navigation



Hum. Reprod. Advance Access published online on February 2, 2005
Human Reproduction, doi:10.1093/humrep/deh546
This Article
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF ) Freely available
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
20/3/709    most recent
deh546v1
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Shamonki, M. I.
Right arrow Articles by Rosenwaks, Z.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Shamonki, M. I.
Right arrow Articles by Rosenwaks, Z.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Human Reproduction © European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology 2005; all rights reserved
Received June 24, 2004
Accepted September 10, 2004

Article

Ultrasound-guided embryo transfer and the accuracy of trial embryo transfer

Mousa I. Shamonki 1, Steven D. Spandorfer 1*, and Zev Rosenwaks 1

1 Cornell Center for Reproductive Medicine, 505 East 70th Street, 3rd floor, New York, NY 10021, USA

* To whom correspondence should be addressed.
Steven D. Spandorfer, E-mail: sdspando{at}med.cornell.edu


  Abstract

BACKGROUND: Studies have suggested that ultrasound-guided embryo transfer (UG-ET) may improve the outcome in IVF; however, several factors may account for the improvement in pregnancy rate. This study examines the use of ultrasound to determine the accuracy of trial transfer (TT) in preparation for ET. METHODS: Sixty-seven consecutive patients prospectively underwent UG-ET over a 2 month period. Total cavity length by US was compared with the length noted by TT. A difference of ≥1 cm was considered significant. All embryos were placed within 1-2 cm of the fundus by US. RESULTS: Twenty patients (29.9%) had a difference of ≥1 cm and 13 patients (19.4%) had a difference of ≤1.5 cm. Patients with a difference of ≥1 or ≥1.5 cm had a significantly greater depth at transfer (P<0.001) and uterine cavity length (P<0.001) when compared with patients without a difference. Clinical pregnancy, implantation, delivery and overall miscarriage rates did not differ between patients with a difference of ≥1 or ≥1.5 cm versus no difference. There were no ectopic pregnancies. CONCLUSIONS: Nineteen percent of patients had a discrepancy of ≥1.5 cm and ~30% had a difference of ≥1 cm from TT at UG-ET, suggesting a benefit to UG-ET. A large prospective randomized trial comparing UG-ET with blind transfer is required to assess further if UG-ET should be used in all cases of ET.

Keywords: embryo transfer; IVF; pregnancy; trial transfer; ultrasound.
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
M. I. Shamonki, G. L. Schattman, S. D. Spandorfer, P. H. Chung, and Z. Rosenwaks
Ultrasound-guided trial transfer may be beneficial in preparation for an IVF cycle
Hum. Reprod., October 1, 2005; 20(10): 2844 - 2849.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.