SynthesisReproduction & fertility2021
Intralipid therapy and adverse reproductive outcome: is there any evidence?
Synthesis in Reproduction & fertility, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers, 1 of them a synthesis 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
13 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 30 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
- Evaluation of intralipid effect on pregnancy outcomes in women with recurrent implantation failure: A retrospective cohort study.International journal of reproductive biomedicine · 2026Article
- Immunological Factors in Recurrent Pregnancy Loss: Mechanisms, Controversies, and Emerging Therapies.Biology · 2025Review
- The impact of GnRH agonists on endometrial immune cells in patients with adenomyosis: a prospective cohort study.BMC medicine · 2025Article
- Impact of SMOFlipid emulsion integration in total parenteral nutrition on inpatient outcomes and economic burden for preterm neonates: a retrospective cohort study.BMC pediatrics · 2025Article
- Exploring the Immunological Aspects and Treatments of Recurrent Pregnancy Loss and Recurrent Implantation Failure.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Alloimmune Causes of Recurrent Pregnancy Loss: Cellular Mechanisms and Overview of Therapeutic Approaches.Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) · 2024Review
- Review
- Endometrial scratching and intralipid treatment-no general recommendations.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2024Article
- NK and T Cell Subtypes in the Endometrium of Patients with Recurrent Pregnancy Loss and Recurrent Implantation Failure: Implications for Pregnancy Success.Journal of clinical medicine · 2023Article
- The Neglected Uterine NK Cells/Hamperl Cells/Endometrial Stromal Granular Cell, or K Cells: A Narrative Review from History through Histology and to Medical Education.International journal of molecular sciences · 2023Review
- Determinants of Embryo Implantation: Roles of the Endometrium and Embryo in Implantation Success.Reproductive sciences (Thousand Oaks, Calif.) · 2023Review
- Immune Cell Functionality during Decidualization and Potential Clinical Application.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Controversy exists regarding the benefits of intravenous intralipid therapy in patients with a poor reproductive history. It is frequently reported that there is no evidence to support the effectiveness, utility or safety for this treatment. While individual studies may be perceived as weak, a systematic review and meta-analysis were performed to determine if there is any advantage to patients. PubMed, Embase and Scopus searches were performed with the target populations being either recurrent pregnancy loss (RPL), or recurrent implantation failure (RIF) undergoing assisted reproductive technology (ART) and receiving intralipid infusions. These cohorts were compared with either placebo, no intervention or alternative treatments. The most relevant outcome measures were considered to be clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), live birth rate (LBR), implantation rate (IR) and miscarriage rate (MR). Twelve studies encompassing 2676 participants met the criteria for selection and were included and reviewed. Treatment of the target population with intralipid led to an improvement in IR (Odds Ratio (OR): 2.97, 2.05-4.29), pregnancy rate (OR: 1.64, 1.31-2.04), and LBR (OR: 2.36, 1.75-3.17), with a reduction in MR (OR: 0.2, 0.14-0.30). Although intravenous intralipid is not recommended as a routine treatment for recurrent miscarriage or implantation failure, there is enough data to suggest consideration in selected patients where routine testing is unremarkable, standard treatments have failed and immunological risk factors are present. The presence of abnormal uterine natural killer (uNK) cells needs more study as a target marker to determine those who could benefit. LAY SUMMARY: There is controversy regarding the benefits and efficacy of intravenous intralipid therapy in patients with a poor reproductive history. It is frequently reported that there is no credible evidence to support their use. A situation we frequently face as medical professionals is patients asking us to consider immune therapy (such as intralipid) for reproductive failure where good quality embryos have been used. Intralipid infusions have been reported to improve pregnancy rates with IVF, and reduce the miscarriage risk in selected patient groups, but study results are not universally accepted. We have performed a detailed review and analysis of the literature to determine if there is any benefit to this immune treatment in specific patient groups. Our paper identified and analyzed 12 studies, finding that treatment with intravenous intralipid leads to an improvement in implantation, pregnancy and live birth rates, with a decrease in miscarriage rate. This study shows that there is evidence to suggest consideration of intralipid in certain patients where standard treatments have failed.
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.