Gynecologic and Obstetric Investigation
Log in to MyKarger to check if you already have access to this content.
Buy
FullText & PDF
Unlimited re-access via MyKarger
Unrestricted printing, no saving restrictions for personal use
read more
CHF 38.00 *
EUR 35.00 *
USD 39.00 *
Select
KAB
Buy a Karger Article Bundle (KAB) and profit from a discount!
If you would like to redeem your KAB credit, please log in.
Save over 20% compared to the individual article price.
Learn more
Rent via DeepDyve
Unlimited fulltext viewing of this article
Organize, annotate and mark up articles
Printing and downloading restrictions apply
Start free trial
Subscribe
Access to all articles of the subscribed year(s) guaranteed for 5 years
Unlimited re-access via Subscriber Login or MyKarger
Unrestricted printing, no saving restrictions for personal use
read more
Subcription rates
Select
* The final prices may differ from the prices shown due to specifics of VAT rules.
Article / Publication Details
Abstract
Objectives: To study the prevalence of chronic endometritis (CE) in infertile women, its impact on reproductive outcomes, and the accuracy of hysteroscopy as a screening tool for CE.
Design: Prospective observational study.
Participants: 514 asymptomatic patients with infertility.
Setting: Tertiary care center.
Methods: The participants underwent a hysteroscopy and endometrial biopsy (EMB). Antibiotics were given for cases of CE.
We investigated the prevalence of CE in patients starting assisted reproductive technologies (ART) as a primary outcome.
Secondary outcomes were the clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) in the ART cycle after hysteroscopy, EMB, and antibiotic treatment in cases of CE; the cumulative CPR in the subsequent 2 years after hysteroscopy and EMB; the sensitivity and specificity of hysteroscopy as a screening tool compared to EMB as the “gold standard” for diagnosing CE.
Results: CE was identified in 2.8% of patients starting ART (11/393). CPRs did not differ significantly between patients with CE and the entire cohort of patients without CE in the subsequent ART cycle (OR 0.43; 95% CI 0.09–2.02) or in the 2 years after EMB (OR 0.56; 95% CI 0.16-1.97). In a matched control comparison (with matching for age, basal FSH, and cause of infertility) CPR in patients with CE did not differ in the subsequent ART cycle (OR 0.39; 95% CI 0.09–1.61); however, their CPR in the 2 years after EMB was significantly lower (OR 0.22; 95% CI 0.13–0.38). The sensitivity and specificity of hysteroscopy as a screening tool for diagnosing CE were 8.3% and 90.1%, respectively.
Limitations: Due to our cohort’s low CE prevalence, we could not detect significant differences in CPRs.
Conclusion: CE is rare in our studied population of asymptomatic patients starting ART. Hysteroscopy cannot replace EMB for diagnosing CE.
S. Karger AG, Basel
Article / Publication Details
Copyright / Drug Dosage / Disclaimer
Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher.
Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug.
Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.
Comments (0)