SynthesisMedicine2019
Effect of hysteroscopy before starting in-vitro fertilization for women with recurrent implantation failure: A meta-analysis and systematic review.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
11 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 20 citations in OpenAlex.
- Interventions for recurrent embryo implantation failure: An umbrella review.International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics · 2025Pooled it
- Whether hysteroscopy improves fertility outcomes in infertile women: a meta-analysis and systematic review.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2024Pooled it
- The association between global and prime diet quality scores and the risk of breast cancer: a case control study.Frontiers in public health · 2026Article
- Impact of uterine cavity manipulation history on clinical and neonatal outcomes forAmerican journal of translational research · 2025Article
- The Efficiency of Introducing Intrauterine Infusion of Autologous Platelet-Rich Plasma versus Granulocyte Colony-Stimulating Factor in Repeated Implantation Failure Patients: An Unblinded Randomised Clinical Trial.International journal of fertility & sterility · 2024Article
- Effect of the decision to perform hysteroscopy on asymptomatic patients before undergoing assisted reproduction technologies-a systematic review and meta-analysis.AJOG global reports · 2023Review
- Role of Hysteroscopy in Patients with Previous In Vitro Fertilization Failure: An Institutional Experience in Rural Population.Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology of India · 2023Article
- Commercially Available Molecular Approaches to Evaluate Endometrial Receptivity: A Systematic Review and Critical Analysis of the Literature.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Review
- Approaches to Improve Endometrial Receptivity in Case of Repeated Implantation Failures.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2021Review
- Determining Diagnostic Criteria of Unexplained Recurrent Implantation Failure: A Retrospective Study of TwoFrontiers in endocrinology · 2021Article
- The effects of diagnostic hysteroscopy on the reproductive outcomes of infertile women without intrauterine pathologies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Korean journal of women health nursing · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo study if hysteroscopy (HSC) before starting an in-vitro fertilization (IVF) cycle improves IVF outcomes in women with recurrent implantation failure (RIF).
methodsThe Medline, Cochrane, EMBASE, and Google Scholar databases were searched using the following keywords until March 31, 2017: in-vitro fertilization; infertility; hysteroscopy; recurrence; embryo implantation; and pregnancy. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs), two-arm prospective studies, and retrospective studies were included.
resultsThree RCTs, 3 nonrandomized prospective studies, and 2 retrospective cohort studies were included. The eligible studies included 3932 women with RIF: 1841 in the HSC group and 2091 in the control group. The clinical pregnancy rate and implantation rate was significantly higher in the HSC group compared with the control group (for clinical pregnancy rate, pooled odds ratio [OR] = 1.64, 95% confidence intervals [CI]: 1.30-2.07, P < 0.001; for implantation rate, pooled OR = 1.22, 95% CI: 1.02-1.45, P = 0.025). The live birth rate (pooled OR = 1.30, 95% CI: 0.90-1.88, P = 0.168) and the miscarriage rate (pooled OR = 0.94, 95% CI: 0.66-1.35, P = 0.744) of the 2 groups were not statistically significantly.
conclusionsHSC improved the implantation rate and clinical pregnancy rates, but failed to improve live birth rate and did not affect the miscarriage rate in women with RIF undergoing IVF. Since HSC plays a significant role in pregnancy and birth outcomes of women with RIF, further studies are warranted.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.