Post-embryo transfer interventions for in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection patients

BACKGROUND: Techniques for embryo transfer (ET) are being developed, optimized, and standardized to provide the best outcomes.This includes methods to reduce the risk of embryo loss following ET. OBJECTIVES: To systematically locate, analyse, and review the best available evidence regarding the effectiveness of post-ET techniques for women undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF) and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched electronic databases; reference lists of primary studies, review articles, and relevant publications; and conference abstracts. No language restrictions were applied. SELECTION CRITERIA: Screening and selection of 2436 possible trial citations were performed independently by two review authors. Four prospective, truly randomised trials met the inclusion criteria. The trials compared two competing post ET interventions or an intervention versus no treatment in women undergoing IVF and ICSI. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently collected data and assessed risk of bias using a standardized data extraction form. Individual outcome data were extracted to support an intention-to-treat analysis. MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome, live birth rate, was not reported in any of the included trials. The ongoing pregnancy rate was only available for one trial that compared immediate ambulation with 30 minute bed rest, with no evidence of an effect with bed rest (OR 1.00; 95% CI 0.54 to 1.85).Secondary outcomes were sporadically reported with the exception of clinical pregnancy rate, which was reported in all of the included trials. There was no significant difference between less bed rest and more rest (OR 1.13; 95% CI 0.77 to 1.67). Nor was there any significant difference between the use of a fibrin sealant and control (OR 0.98; 95% CI 0.54 to 1.78). Even so, there was a significantly higher probability of pregnancy following mechanical closure of the cervix compared with no intervention (OR 1.92; 95% CI 1.40 to 2.63).The risk of bias of the included studies was variable. The reporting of a proper method of randomisation and allocation concealment was demonstrated in the majority of trials, while only one trial was reported to be blinded. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence to support a certain amount of time for women to remain recumbent following ET, or to support the use of fibrin sealants. Finally, there is limited evidence to support the use of mechanical closure of the cervical canal following ET. Further well-designed and powered studies are required to determine the true effect, if any, of these and other post ET techniques for women undergoing IVF and ICSI.