ReviewKorean journal of women health nursing2020
The effects of diagnostic hysteroscopy on the reproductive outcomes of infertile women without intrauterine pathologies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
Review in Korean journal of women health nursing, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Whether hysteroscopy improves fertility outcomes in infertile women: a meta-analysis and systematic review.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2024Pooled it
- Assessing the Reliability of Hysteroscopic Sampling Methods for Diagnosing Atypical Endometrial Hyperplasia.Cancers · 2025Article
- Outcomes and complications of pre-assisted reproductive technology hysteroscopic evaluation and treatment: a cross-sectional study at a Nigerian teaching hospital.Contraception and reproductive medicine · 2025Article
- Is it necessary to perform a diagnostic hysteroscopy before the first embryo transfer?-A retrospective study.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- Article
- Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Purpose: Hysteroscopy can be used both to diagnose and to treat intrauterine pathologies. It is well known that hysteroscopy helps to improve reproductive outcomes by treating intrauterine pathologies. However, it is uncertain whether hysteroscopy is helpful in the absence of intrauterine pathologies. This study aimed to confirm whether hysteroscopy improves the reproductive outcomes of infertile women without intrauterine pathologies. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of 11 studies retrieved from Ovid-MEDLINE, Ovid-Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Two independent investigators extracted the data and used risk-of-bias tools (RoB 2.0 and ROBINS-I) to assess their quality. Results: Diagnostic hysteroscopy prior to in vitro fertilization (IVF)/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) was associated with a higher clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) and live birth rate (LBR) than non-hysteroscopy in patients with recurrent implantation failure (RIF) (odds ratio, 1.79 and 1.46; 95% confidence interval, 1.40-2.30 and 1.08-1.97 for CPR and LBR, respectively) while hysteroscopy prior to first IVF was ineffective. The overall meta-analysis of LBR showed statistically significant findings for RIF, but a subgroup analysis showed effects only in prospective cohorts (odds ratio, 1.40 and 1.47; 95% confidence interval, 0.62-3.16 and 1.04-2.07 for randomized controlled trials and prospective cohorts, respectively). Therefore, the LBR should be interpreted carefully and further research is needed. Conclusion: Although further research is warranted, hysteroscopy may be considered as a diagnostic and treatment option for infertile women who have experienced RIF regardless of intrauterine pathologies. This finding enables nurses to educate and support infertile women with RIF prior to IVF/ICSI.
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.