Ultrasound guidance during embryo transfer: a systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials

• Published in: Ultrasound in obstetrics & gynecology Vol. 45; no. 2; pp. 139 - 148
• Main Authors: Teixeira, D. M., Dassunção, L. A., Vieira, C. V. R., Barbosa, M. A. P., Coelho Neto, M. A., Nastri, C. O., Martins, W. P.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Chichester, UK John Wiley & Sons, Ltd 01-02-2015; Wiley Subscription Services, Inc
• Subjects: assisted reproductive techniques; embryo transfer; Embryo Transfer - methods; Female; Humans; ICSI; IVF; Pregnancy; Pregnancy Outcome; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome; ultrasonography; Ultrasonography, Interventional - methods; IVF; ICSI; ultrasonography; embryo transfer; assisted reproductive techniques
• ISSN: 0960-7692; 1469-0705
• DOI: 10.1002/uog.14639

ABSTRACT
Objectives
To summarize the current evidence on the effect of using ultrasound (US) guidance during embryo transfer (ET).
Methods
In this systematic review, we included randomized controlled trials examining the effect of the use of US guidance during ET; data from studies using the same catheter type in study arms were not pooled with the results from studies that used different catheter types.
Results
Twenty‐one studies were included in the quantitative analysis: 18 compared ‘US guidance’ with ‘clinical touch’, of which one was subsequently excluded from the quantitative meta‐analysis owing to a lack of available data, three studies compared transvaginal US guidance with transabdominal US guidance, and one study compared ‘hysterosonometry before ET’ with US guidance. Comparison of the use of US guidance with clinical touch, in studies that used the same catheter type in the study arms, indicated a benefit of using US guidance during ET on the rates of live birth (relative risk (RR), 1.48 (95% CI, 1.16–1.87)), based on two studies involving 888 women with moderate‐quality evidence, and on the rates of clinical pregnancy (RR, 1.32 (95% CI, 1.18–1.46)), based on 13 studies involving 3641 women with high‐quality evidence. However, when comparing the use of US guidance with clinical touch in studies that used different catheter types, the results suggest that using US guidance during ET has no effect on the rates of reproductive outcome: live birth (RR, 0.99 (95% CI, 0.83–1.19)), based on one study involving 1649 women with moderate‐quality evidence; clinical pregnancy (RR, 1.04 (95% CI, 0.89–1.21)), based on five studies involving 2949 women with moderate‐quality evidence. The estimates for the rate of miscarriage and for the other identified comparisons were imprecise.
Conclusions
The available evidence suggests that there is a benefit of using US guidance during ET. However, both US‐guided transfer and clinical touch should be considered acceptable, as the benefit of US is not large and should be balanced against the increased cost and need to change the catheter type. More studies are required before conclusions can be drawn regarding the effect of other techniques on reproductive outcome. Copyright © 2014 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
Linked Comment: Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2015; 45: 131–131