Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41052783›Full record

ArticleHuman reproduction (Oxford, England)2025

Cumulative live birth rates in women with endometriosis undergoing ART treatment.

Repon C Paul, Rebecca Deans, Amanda Henry, Cecilia Ng, Ingrid Rowlands, Gita D Mishra, Jason Abbott, Georgina M Chambers

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Human reproduction (Oxford, England), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

8 authors.

Repon C PaulNational Perinatal Epidemiology and Statistics Unit (NPESU), Centre for Big Data Research in Health (CBDRH), University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-2909-5691
Rebecca DeansSchool of Clinical Medicine, Medicine and Health, Discipline of Women's Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Amanda HenrySchool of Clinical Medicine, Medicine and Health, Discipline of Women's Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.ORCID 0000-0002-7351-8922
Cecilia NgSchool of Clinical Medicine, Medicine and Health, Discipline of Women's Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Ingrid RowlandsPopulation Health Program, QIMR Berghofer Medical Research Institute, Brisbane, QLD, Australia.
Gita D MishraAustralian Women and Girls' Health Research Centre, School of Public Health, University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia.ORCID 0000-0001-9610-5904
Jason AbbottSchool of Clinical Medicine, Medicine and Health, Discipline of Women's Health, University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.
Georgina M ChambersNational Perinatal Epidemiology and Statistics Unit (NPESU), Centre for Big Data Research in Health (CBDRH), University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia.ORCID 0000-0003-0215-3249

Funding

Medical Research Future Fund MRFRFD000065
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

study questionHow do cumulative live birth rates (CLBRs) in women with endometriosis compare to those with other infertility diagnoses undergoing ART? SUMMARY ANSWER: Women with endometriosis as the sole cause of infertility achieved higher CLBRs compared to those with additional infertility diagnoses (endometriosis-plus) or other non-endometriosis causes of infertility. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Endometriosis affects approximately 10% of women of reproductive age and is a major cause of infertility, with many women resorting to ART treatments in the hope of achieving a pregnancy. However, the comparative success rates of ART for these women, compared to those with other causes of infertility is not well understood. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This retrospective cohort study included 79 318 women who initiated autologous ART between 2014 and 2019 in Australia and New Zealand, with follow-up through 2021 or the first live birth. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING,

methodsParticipants were categorized into three groups based on infertility diagnosis: endometriosis-only (n = 4311), endometriosis-plus (n = 6312; endometriosis with other infertility factors) and other-infertility (n = 68 695; no endometriosis). Conservative and optimal CLBRs were calculated based on assumptions made about the chance of live birth for women who discontinued treatment. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Endometriosis was reported as the sole cause of infertility in 5% of women (endometriosis-only), while 8% had endometriosis with other diagnoses (endometriosis-plus). The remaining women had either other causes of infertility (63%) or unexplained infertility (24%). Depending on assumptions made regarding patients who discontinued treatment, the CLBR by the sixth complete cycle for women diagnosed with endometriosis-only ranged from 64% to 83%; for women with an endometriosis-plus diagnoses, the CLBR ranged from 54.3% to 68.7%; and for women without endometriosis, the CLBR ranged from 57.3% to 76.5%. Compared to women without endometriosis, the live birth rate was 6% higher in endometriosis-only group (RR: 1.06; 95% CI: 1.04-1.08) and 5% lower in endometriosis-plus group (RR: 0.95; 95% CI: 0.93-0.97). Compared to the endometriosis-only group, pregnancy loss was 46% higher (RR: 1.46; 95% CI: 1.35-1.59) in endometriosis-plus group. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The study did not assess endometriosis severity or phenotype, which may influence ART outcomes. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE

findingsThese findings provide critical data for counselling women with endometriosis regarding ART success. The higher CLBR in the endometriosis-only group suggests that isolated endometriosis does not negatively impact ART outcomes and highlights the need for tailored management in women with additional infertility factors. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This study is funded through the Medical Research Future Fund (MRFF) Research Data Infrastructure grant (MRFRFD000065). The sponsors had no role in the design and conduct of the study; data collection, management, analysis and interpretation; manuscript preparation, review, or approval; or the decision to submit for publication. FSANZ contracts National Perinatal Epidemiology and Statistics Unit (NPESU) of the University of New South Wales (UNSW) to prepare annual reports and benchmarking reports from the Australian and New Zealand Assisted Reproductive Technology Database (ANZARD): one of those datasets is used in this study. R.C.P. is a Research Fellow of the NPESU, UNSW. G.M.C. is the Director of the NPESU, UNSW. J.A. reports support from the Medical Research Future Fund and the Australian Government Department of Health and Aged Care, consulting fees from Hologic and Gedeon Richter, honoraria from Hologic, and advisory board participation with Gedeon Richter. G.D.M. reports funding from the NHMRC and the Australian Government Department of Health and Aged Care and is lead editor of a book published by Oxford University Press. C.N. reports institutional funding, an unpaid leadership role with ACTA and is a former employee of CSL Vifor. R.D., A.H., and I.R. declare no conflicts of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Indexed as

Birth RateEndometriosisInfertility, FemaleLive BirthReproductive Techniques, AssistedAdultAustraliaFemaleHumansNew ZealandPregnancyPregnancy RateRetrospective Studiesassisted reproductive technologycomplete cyclecumulative live birth rateendometriosisinfertility

Identifiers

PMID41052783
PMCPMC12675415

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.