Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30125306›Full record

Trial reportPloS one2018

Endometriosis and ART: A prior history of surgery for OMA is associated with a poor ovarian response to hyperstimulation.

Mathilde Bourdon, Jade Raad, Yaniv Dahan, Louis Marcellin, Chloé Maignien, Marc Even, Khaled Pocate-Cheriet, Marie Charlotte Lamau, Pietro Santulli, Charles Chapron

Abstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in PloS one, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

14 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

10 authors.

Mathilde BourdonDepartment of Gynecology Obstetrics II and Reproductive Medicine; Université Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Cochin, Paris France.
Jade RaadDepartment of Gynecology Obstetrics II and Reproductive Medicine; Université Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Cochin, Paris France.
Yaniv DahanDepartment of Gynecology Obstetrics II and Reproductive Medicine; Université Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Cochin, Paris France.
Louis MarcellinDepartment of Gynecology Obstetrics II and Reproductive Medicine; Université Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Cochin, Paris France.
Chloé MaignienDepartment of Gynecology Obstetrics II and Reproductive Medicine; Université Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Cochin, Paris France.
Marc EvenDepartment of Gynecology Obstetrics II and Reproductive Medicine; Université Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Cochin, Paris France.
Khaled Pocate-CherietDepartment of Histology-Embryology and Reproductive Biology; Université Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Cochin, Paris, France.
Marie Charlotte LamauDepartment of Gynecology Obstetrics II and Reproductive Medicine; Université Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Cochin, Paris France.
Pietro SantulliDepartment of Gynecology Obstetrics II and Reproductive Medicine; Université Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Cochin, Paris France.ORCID 0000-0002-4985-7326
Charles ChapronDepartment of Gynecology Obstetrics II and Reproductive Medicine; Université Paris Descartes, Sorbonne Paris Cité, Centre Hospitalier Universitaire (CHU) Cochin, Paris France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundMany women whose fertility may have been impaired by endometriosis require assisted reproductive technology (ART) in order to become pregnant. However, the influence of ovarian endometriosis (OMA) on ovarian responsiveness to hyperstimulation has not been clearly established.

objectiveTo evaluate the risk of a poor ovarian response (POR) to stimulation and ART outcomes in women with OMA. MATERIALS AND

methodsWe conducted a large observational controlled matched cohort study in a tertiary care university hospital between 01/10/2012 and 31/12/2015. After matching by age and anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) levels, 201 infertile women afflicted with OMA (the OMA group) and 402 disease-free women (the control group) undergoing an ART procedure were included in the study. The main outcomes that we measured were a POR to hyperstimulation (i.e., ≤ 3 oocytes retrieved, or cancelled cycles), the clinical pregnancy rate, and the live birth rate. All of the women with endometriosis underwent a pre-ART work-up, in order to obtain an accurate diagnosis and staging of their disease. An OMA diagnosis was based on published imaging criteria (obtained by transvaginal sonography or magnetic resonance imaging) or on histological analysis for patients with a prior history of endometriosis surgery. The statistical analyses were conducted using univariate and multivariate logistic regression models.

resultsThe incidence of a POR to hyperstimulation was significantly higher for the OMA group than for the control group [62/201 (30.8%) versus 90/402 (22.3%), respectively; p = 0.02]. However, no significant differences were found between the OMA and the control group in terms of the clinical pregnancy rate [53/151 (35%) versus 134/324 (41.3%), respectively; p = 0.23] and the live birth rate [39/151 (25.8%) versus 99/324 (30.5%), respectively; p = 0.33]. By multivariate analysis, a prior history of surgery for OMA was found to be an independent factor associated with a POR to stimulation [OR = 2.1; 95% CI: 1.1-4.0], unlike OMA without a prior history of surgery [OR: 1.5; 95% CI: 0.9-2.2].

conclusionThe presence of OMA during ART treatment increased the risk of a POR to hyperstimulation, although the live birth rate was not affected. Furthermore, having OMA and having previously undergone surgery for OMA was identified as an independent risk factor for a POR.

Indexed as

EndometriosisOvulation InductionPostoperative ComplicationsAdultAnti-Mullerian HormoneFemaleGynecologic Surgical ProceduresHumansOvaryRetrospective StudiesAnti-Mullerian Hormone

Identifiers

PMID30125306
PMCPMC6101383

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.