Minimizing embryo expulsion after embryo transfer: a randomized controlled study (2024)

Article Navigation

Volume 20 Issue 1 January 2005

Article Contents

  • Abstract

  • Introduction

  • Materials and methods

  • Results

  • Discussion

  • References

  • < Previous
  • Next >

Journal Article

Ragaa Mansour

The Egyptian IVF-ET Center, 3 Road 161 Hadayek El-Maadi, Cairo 11431, Egypt

1To whom correspondence should be addressed. or Email: ivf@link.net

Search for other works by this author on:

Oxford Academic

Human Reproduction, Volume 20, Issue 1, January 2005, Pages 170–174, https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deh573

Published:

01 January 2005

Article history

Received:

13 November 2003

Accepted:

29 September 2004

Published:

01 January 2005

A correction has been published: Human Reproduction, Volume 20, Issue 4, April 2005, Page 1118, https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deh791

  • PDF
  • Split View
  • Views
    • Article contents
    • Figures & tables
    • Video
    • Audio
    • Supplementary Data
  • Cite

    Cite

    Ragaa Mansour, Minimizing embryo expulsion after embryo transfer: a randomized controlled study, Human Reproduction, Volume 20, Issue 1, January 2005, Pages 170–174, https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deh573

    Close

Search

Close

Search

Advanced Search

Search Menu

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The aim of this work was to modify the embryo transfer technique to prevent expulsion of the embryos by exerting gentle mechanical pressure on the cervix using the vaginal speculum. METHODS: A total of 639 infertile patients undergoing ICSI were prospectively randomized into two groups using sealed dark envelopes. In the study group (n=325) the screw of the vaginal speculum was loosened in order to exert a gentle pressure on the portiovaginalis of the cervix before ejecting the embryos, and was maintained for 7 min afterwards. In the control group (n=314) no pressure was applied on the cervix during embryo transfer and the vaginal speculum was removed after transferring the embryos. RESULTS: The clinical pregnancy rate was significantly higher in the study group than in the control group [207/325 (67%) versus 150/314 (47.8%); odds ratio (OR) 1.39; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.11–1.74]. The implantation rate was also significantly higher in the study group [304/913 (33.3%) versus 198/920 (21.5%); OR 1.54; 95% CI 1.26–1.89]. CONCLUSIONS: Applying gentle mechanical pressure on the portiovaginalis of the cervix using the vaginal speculum during and after transferring the embryos significantly improved clinical pregnancy and implantation rates.

embryo transfer technique, ICSI, implantation rate, IVF, pregnancy rate

Introduction

Transferring the embryos into the uterine cavity is the last and most critical step in IVF. It is routinely done through the transcervical route and is associated with multiple potential negative factors (Mansour and Aboulghar, 2002). One of these negative factors is the initiation of uterine contractions at the time of embryo transfer. Passing the catheter through the internal cervical os may initiate reflex uterine contractions (Fanchin et al., 1998), possibly through the release of prostaglandins (Fraser, 1992). It has been demonstrated that ∼15% of the transferred embryos are expelled after embryo transfer, and could be collected from the tip of the catheter, external cervical os and the vaginal speculum (Poindexter et al., 1986).

The aim of this work is to modify the embryo transfer technique to prevent expulsion of the embryos from the uterine cavity after embryo transfer by applying gentle mechanical pressure on the portiovaginalis of the cervix using the vaginal speculum.

Materials and methods

Participants

Patients included in the study were infertile couples undergoing their first ICSI trial for male factor infertility at the Egyptian IVF-ET Center. The female partners were <39 years old with a normal hormonal profile and no pelvic pathology. Azoospermic patients requiring surgical retrieval of spermatozoa were excluded from the study. Ethical approval for the study was obtained from the institutional review board. The period of study was from January 2001 to January 2002.

Design and procedures

The pituitary was down-regulated using long-protocol GnRH agonist analogue. It was given in the form of subcutaneous tripterolin 0.1 mg/day (decapeptyl; Ferring, GmbH, Kiel, Germany) starting in the late luteal phase until HCG injection. After pituitary down-regulation was confirmed by estradiol level <50 pg/ml, ovarian stimulation was started by giving HMG 150–300 IU/day (Menogone; Ferring) for 7 days, and then the dose was modified according to the response. HCG (10 000 IU) (Pregnyl; Nile Co., Cairo, Egypt) was given intramuscularly when the leading three follicles reached 18 mm in mean diameter. Oocyte pick-up was carried out 36 h after HCG injection through the ultrasonic transvaginal route. Oocyte injection and embryo culture was as described previously (Mansour et al., 1996).

Embryo transfer was performed 48–72 h after oocyte pick-up by the same gynecologist (R.M.) for this study. Eligible patients were randomly allocated to the study or control group using sealed dark envelopes prepared by the embryologist. Details of the recruitment and randomization of patients are given in the flow diagram (Figure 1). In both groups, the embryo transfer was done at the lithotomy position. The previously taken ultrasound picture of the uterus and dummy embryo transfer (Mansour et al., 1990) were revised to get an idea of the length and direction of the uterine cavity. After visualizing the portiovaginalis of the cervix using Cusco's speculum, the cervix was cleaned using sterile gauze and tissue culture media (DPBS or Ham's F10). The cervical mucus was aspirated gently and repeatedly at the external cervical os using a 1 ml syringe. A dummy embryo transfer was done using a sterile Wallace catheter (1816 N, HG; Wallace Ltd, Colchester, UK) to make sure that it could be introduced easily through the internal os. If it could not be introduced, a more rigid catheter (Cook, Queensland, Australia) was tried. After performing the dummy embryo transfer, the embryos were loaded into a new catheter, either Wallace or Cook according to the dummy embryo transfer, as follows. The embryo transfer catheter was rinsed then filled with tissue culture medium. About 10–20 ml tissue culture medium was aspirated, then the embryos (up to three) were aspirated in ∼10–20 ml tissue culture medium so that the embryos would be away from the tip of the catheter. If the Wallace catheter was used, the soft internal catheter, protruding from the external rigid sheath, was introduced gently through the internal cervical os and stopped ∼1 cm below the fundus. The outer rigid sheath was stopped just at the internal cervical os and not pushed beyond it. If the Cook catheter was used, the tip of the inner catheter was positioned flush with the external sheath until it passed the internal cervical os, then the internal sheath one was advanced 2 cm into the uterine cavity. The uterine cavity length and direction was determined previously by ultrasonography and a dummy embryo transfer.

In the study group, after introducing the embryo transfer catheter, the screw of the vaginal speculum was loosened so that its two lips would close gently on the portiovaginalis of the cervix (Figure 2). At this point, after passing the internal os and loosening the speculum to close on the cervix, some patients experienced suprapubic heaviness, mild discomfort or cramping. After waiting for ∼1–2 min, when this complaint disappeared, the embryos were ejected into the uterine cavity, the plunger of the syringe was kept pressed, and the embryo transfer catheter was withdrawn very slowly in gradual spiral movements. Then, the vaginal speculum was left in place pressing on the cervix after withdrawal of the catheter for 5–7 min before removal.

In the control group, the procedure was performed as in the study group, except that after introducing the embryo transfer catheter through the internal os and stopping 1 cm short of the fundus, the embryos were ejected into the uterine cavity and the catheter was withdrawn very slowly. In contrast to the study group, the screw of the vaginal speculum was not loosened to close on the portiovaginalis (Figure 3), and it was removed after withdrawal of the catheter. After completion of the embryo transfer in both groups, the patients stayed in bed for ∼4–6 h before going home. Luteal phase support was given in the form of progesterone (Steris, Phoenix, AZ, USA) 100 mg as an intramuscular injection daily. Serum β-HCG test was done 2 weeks after embryo transfer and ultrasound was done 3 weeks later after a positive pregnancy test.

Statistical analysis

Data were collected on standard sheets and entered into a database.

Data are presented as mean±standard deviation. Different outcome measures were compared using Student's t-test or χ2-test where appropriate. P-values <0.05 were considered to be significant. Statistics were done using Arcus Quickstat (version I).

The sample size of 654 women provides 80% power and a two-sided significance level of 0.05 to test whether the modified embryo transfer technique is equivalent or even superior to the control group in an IVF/embryo transfer program. This sample size has adequate power to detect a difference of 10% in pregnancy rate/treated cycle.

Results

The study included 639 patients who underwent embryo transfer procedures by the same gynecologist (R.M.) in the period between from January 2001 to January 2002. There was no significant difference in the mean age, infertility period, number of oocytes retrieved, metaphase II oocytes and oocytes fertilized in both groups (Table I). There was no significant difference in the number of HMG ampules used in both groups. There was no significant difference in the ratio of catheter type per total number in each group [Cook catheter was used in 36/325 (11%) in study group versus 32/314 (10%) in the control group]. A total of 357 clinical pregnancies resulted, achieving a pregnancy rate per embryo transfer of 55.9%. The clinical pregnancy rate was significantly higher in the study group as compared with the control group [207/325 (67%) versus 150/314 (47.8%); odds ratio (OR) 1.39; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.11–1.74]. The implantation rate was also significantly higher in the study group [304/913 (33.3%) versus 198/920 (21.5%); OR 1.54; 95% CI 1.26–1.89] (Table II). It was tolerable for all patients in the study group to have the speculum left in place for an average of 7 min after transferring the embryos, except for eight patients who felt uncomfortable, and the speculum had to be removed. In 10 more cases it was not possible to hold the portiovaginalis inbetween the two valves of the speculum for anatomical reasons. The mean time that the speculum was left in place after transferring the embryos in the study group was 6.51±2.92 min. The time taken to perform the whole embryo transfer procedure including dummy embryo transfer, loading the catheter and actual embryo transfer was 28.33±6.37 min in the study group and 20.42±3.45 min in the control group.

Discussion

Immediate or delayed expulsion of embryos after transferring them into the uterine cavity has always been a major concern in assisted reproduction (Harper et al., 1961; Menezo et al., 1985; Poindexter et al., 1986; Schulman, 1986; Meldrum et al., 1987). In two different studies mimicking embryo transfer, one using a radio opaque dye (Knutzen et al., 1992) and the other using a methylene blue dye (Mansour et al., 1994), it was found that the dye was extruded from the uterine cavity in 42% of the cases. Using artificial dried embryos for training in IVF, it was also found that only 45% of the embryos were present within the uterine cavity 1 h after the transfer (Menezo et al., 1985). It has also been observed that after embryo transfer, the embryos can as easily move towards the cervical canal as towards the Fallopian tubes (Woolcott and Stanger, 1997; 1998). Moreover, ∼15% of the embryos were found to be extruded after embryo transfer (Poindexter et al., 1986). The presence of endometrial movements has been recognized by several groups (Birnholz, 1984; Ijland et al., 1996). Stimulation of the cervix can lead to the release of oxytocin and consequently induces uterine contractility. In a prospective clinical study by Dorn et al., (1999), serial blood samples were collected in time intervals of 20 s during the embryo transfer procedure to measure oxytocin concentration in serum. It was found that when a tenaculum was used, oxytocin was temporarily elevated until the end of the embryo transfer procedure. When a tenaculum was not used, no increase in serum oxytocin concentration was observed. These findings from previous studies have raised concern about the possibility of losing embryos after embryo transfer, and the motive behind this study was to try to develop a technique to reduce embryo expulsion after embryo transfer.

The idea behind this study is very simple. It depends on applying gentle pressure on the cervical canal at the time of the reflex uterine contractions that result from passing the embryo transfer catheter through the internal os, because these contractions may lead to the extrusion of the embryos after embryo transfer. By closing the vaginal speculum, light pressure from the two valves of the speculum is applied on the portiovaginalis of the cervix. This results in gently pressing the anterior and posterior lips of the cervix together, possibly obstructing the cervical canal up to the internal os. This simple technique significantly improved the pregnancy rate when compared with the control group.

The study does not suggest a mechanism by which the higher pregnancy rate was obtained in the study group. Only a methodological approach looking at the outcome of mock embryo transfer demonstrating displacement of markers following occlusion or no occlusion of the cervix might allow an explanation. The improvement in the results may have resulted from phenomena not directly linked to attempting to occlude the cervix, such as the increase in wait time before ejecting the embryos.

It was reasonably tolerable for the patients to have the speculum left in place for an average of 6.5 min after embryo transfer. The time taken to perform embryo transfer in the study group was only an average of 8.5 min longer than in the control group, and did not make a difference to the patient or the doctor.

In conclusion, this is a simple modification of the embryo transfer technique that significantly improved the implantation and clinical pregnancy rates. Since the completion of the study, this modified embryo transfer technique has been a routine procedure for all cases. The method is to apply gentle mechanical pressure on the portiovaginalis of the cervix using the vaginal speculum before and after ejecting the embryos into the uterine cavity to prevent their extrusion. Further experimental studies are being undertaken using dummy embryo transfer to explain the mechanism of action of this technique.

Figure 2.

Minimizing embryo expulsion after embryo transfer: a randomized controlled study (4)

Open in new tabDownload slide

Study group. The two valves of the vaginal speculum closed on the cervix.

Figure 3.

Minimizing embryo expulsion after embryo transfer: a randomized controlled study (5)

Open in new tabDownload slide

Control group. The two valves of the vaginal speculum are open.

Table I.

Patient's characteristics, ovarian response and fertilization

Study groupControl groupP-value
Number of ET procedures325314
Age (years)0.13 (NS)
Mean31.22±4.6631.59±4.34
Range18–3921–39
Duration of infertility (years)0.49 (NS)
Mean6.75±4.416.73±4.36
Range1–211–19
Number of HMG ampoules0.98 (NS)
Mean±SD37.08±13.1937.04±13.51OR 1.01
Range10–9614–9095% CI 0.62–1.62
Number of oocytes retrieved400940260.36 (NS)
Mean±SD12.7±6.912.7±6.9
Range5–394–36
MII oocytes315830710.34 (NS)
Mean±SD9.99±5.379.67±5.37OR 1.03
Range4–283–2595% CI 0.96–1.10
2PN oocytes209419700.27 (NS)
Mean6.69±3.746.31±4.03OR 1.07
Range3–203–2495% CI 0.98–1.15
Fertilization rate (%)66.364.20.08 (NS)
Study groupControl groupP-value
Number of ET procedures325314
Age (years)0.13 (NS)
Mean31.22±4.6631.59±4.34
Range18–3921–39
Duration of infertility (years)0.49 (NS)
Mean6.75±4.416.73±4.36
Range1–211–19
Number of HMG ampoules0.98 (NS)
Mean±SD37.08±13.1937.04±13.51OR 1.01
Range10–9614–9095% CI 0.62–1.62
Number of oocytes retrieved400940260.36 (NS)
Mean±SD12.7±6.912.7±6.9
Range5–394–36
MII oocytes315830710.34 (NS)
Mean±SD9.99±5.379.67±5.37OR 1.03
Range4–283–2595% CI 0.96–1.10
2PN oocytes209419700.27 (NS)
Mean6.69±3.746.31±4.03OR 1.07
Range3–203–2495% CI 0.98–1.15
Fertilization rate (%)66.364.20.08 (NS)

ET = embryo transfer; NS = not significant; SD = standard deviation; MII = metaphase II; 2PN = two pronuclei.

Open in new tab

Table I.

Patient's characteristics, ovarian response and fertilization

Study groupControl groupP-value
Number of ET procedures325314
Age (years)0.13 (NS)
Mean31.22±4.6631.59±4.34
Range18–3921–39
Duration of infertility (years)0.49 (NS)
Mean6.75±4.416.73±4.36
Range1–211–19
Number of HMG ampoules0.98 (NS)
Mean±SD37.08±13.1937.04±13.51OR 1.01
Range10–9614–9095% CI 0.62–1.62
Number of oocytes retrieved400940260.36 (NS)
Mean±SD12.7±6.912.7±6.9
Range5–394–36
MII oocytes315830710.34 (NS)
Mean±SD9.99±5.379.67±5.37OR 1.03
Range4–283–2595% CI 0.96–1.10
2PN oocytes209419700.27 (NS)
Mean6.69±3.746.31±4.03OR 1.07
Range3–203–2495% CI 0.98–1.15
Fertilization rate (%)66.364.20.08 (NS)
Study groupControl groupP-value
Number of ET procedures325314
Age (years)0.13 (NS)
Mean31.22±4.6631.59±4.34
Range18–3921–39
Duration of infertility (years)0.49 (NS)
Mean6.75±4.416.73±4.36
Range1–211–19
Number of HMG ampoules0.98 (NS)
Mean±SD37.08±13.1937.04±13.51OR 1.01
Range10–9614–9095% CI 0.62–1.62
Number of oocytes retrieved400940260.36 (NS)
Mean±SD12.7±6.912.7±6.9
Range5–394–36
MII oocytes315830710.34 (NS)
Mean±SD9.99±5.379.67±5.37OR 1.03
Range4–283–2595% CI 0.96–1.10
2PN oocytes209419700.27 (NS)
Mean6.69±3.746.31±4.03OR 1.07
Range3–203–2495% CI 0.98–1.15
Fertilization rate (%)66.364.20.08 (NS)

ET = embryo transfer; NS = not significant; SD = standard deviation; MII = metaphase II; 2PN = two pronuclei.

Open in new tab

Table II.

Outcome of treatment

Study groupControl groupP-value
No. transferred embryos913920(NS) 0.73
Mean±SD per patient2.91±0.62.89±0.69OR 0.95
95% CI 0.83–1.04
No good quality embryos (grade I, II)821829(NS) 0.87
Mean±SD per patient (%)2.16±0.87 (89.92)2.30±0.87 (90.11)OR 0.99
95% CI 0.87–1.14
No. poor quality embryos, (grade III)9291(NS) 0.44
Mean±SD per patient (%)1.83±1.00 (10.08)1.87±0.97 (9.89)OR 1.02
95% CI 0.75–1.38
Implantation rate (%)304/913 (33.3)198/920 (21.5)0.00002
OR 1.54
95% CI 1.26–1.89
Clinical pregnancy rate per transfer (%)207/325 (67.4)150/314 (47.8)0.009
OR 1.39
95% CI 1.11–1.74
Multiple pregnancy rate (%)79/207 (38.2)38/150 (25.3)0.09 (NS)
OR 1.35
95% CI 0.88–2.07
Study groupControl groupP-value
No. transferred embryos913920(NS) 0.73
Mean±SD per patient2.91±0.62.89±0.69OR 0.95
95% CI 0.83–1.04
No good quality embryos (grade I, II)821829(NS) 0.87
Mean±SD per patient (%)2.16±0.87 (89.92)2.30±0.87 (90.11)OR 0.99
95% CI 0.87–1.14
No. poor quality embryos, (grade III)9291(NS) 0.44
Mean±SD per patient (%)1.83±1.00 (10.08)1.87±0.97 (9.89)OR 1.02
95% CI 0.75–1.38
Implantation rate (%)304/913 (33.3)198/920 (21.5)0.00002
OR 1.54
95% CI 1.26–1.89
Clinical pregnancy rate per transfer (%)207/325 (67.4)150/314 (47.8)0.009
OR 1.39
95% CI 1.11–1.74
Multiple pregnancy rate (%)79/207 (38.2)38/150 (25.3)0.09 (NS)
OR 1.35
95% CI 0.88–2.07

NS = not significant; SD = standard deviation.

Open in new tab

Table II.

Outcome of treatment

Study groupControl groupP-value
No. transferred embryos913920(NS) 0.73
Mean±SD per patient2.91±0.62.89±0.69OR 0.95
95% CI 0.83–1.04
No good quality embryos (grade I, II)821829(NS) 0.87
Mean±SD per patient (%)2.16±0.87 (89.92)2.30±0.87 (90.11)OR 0.99
95% CI 0.87–1.14
No. poor quality embryos, (grade III)9291(NS) 0.44
Mean±SD per patient (%)1.83±1.00 (10.08)1.87±0.97 (9.89)OR 1.02
95% CI 0.75–1.38
Implantation rate (%)304/913 (33.3)198/920 (21.5)0.00002
OR 1.54
95% CI 1.26–1.89
Clinical pregnancy rate per transfer (%)207/325 (67.4)150/314 (47.8)0.009
OR 1.39
95% CI 1.11–1.74
Multiple pregnancy rate (%)79/207 (38.2)38/150 (25.3)0.09 (NS)
OR 1.35
95% CI 0.88–2.07
Study groupControl groupP-value
No. transferred embryos913920(NS) 0.73
Mean±SD per patient2.91±0.62.89±0.69OR 0.95
95% CI 0.83–1.04
No good quality embryos (grade I, II)821829(NS) 0.87
Mean±SD per patient (%)2.16±0.87 (89.92)2.30±0.87 (90.11)OR 0.99
95% CI 0.87–1.14
No. poor quality embryos, (grade III)9291(NS) 0.44
Mean±SD per patient (%)1.83±1.00 (10.08)1.87±0.97 (9.89)OR 1.02
95% CI 0.75–1.38
Implantation rate (%)304/913 (33.3)198/920 (21.5)0.00002
OR 1.54
95% CI 1.26–1.89
Clinical pregnancy rate per transfer (%)207/325 (67.4)150/314 (47.8)0.009
OR 1.39
95% CI 1.11–1.74
Multiple pregnancy rate (%)79/207 (38.2)38/150 (25.3)0.09 (NS)
OR 1.35
95% CI 0.88–2.07

NS = not significant; SD = standard deviation.

Open in new tab

References

Birnholz JC (

1984

) Ultrasonic visualization of endometrial movements.

Fertil Steril

41

,

157

–158.

Dorn C, Reinsberg J, Schlebusch H, Prietl G, van der Ven H and Krebs D (

1999

) Serum oxytocin concentration during embryo transfer procedure.

Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol

87

,

77

–80.

Fanchin R, Righini C, Olivennes F, Taylor S, de Ziegler D and Frydman R (

1998

) Uterine contractions at the time of embryo transfer alter pregnancy rates after in-vitro fertilization.

Hum Reprod

13

,

1968

–1974.

Fraser IS (

1992

) Prostaglandins, prostaglandin inhibitors and their roles in gynaecological disorders.

Baillieres Clin Obstet Gynaecol

6

,

829

–857.

Harper MJK, Bennett JP and Rowson LE (

1961

) A possible explanation for the failure of non-surgical ovum transfer in the cow.

Nature

190

,

789

–790.

Ijland MM, Evers JL, Dunselman GA, van Katwijk C, Lo CR and Hoogland HJ (

1996

) Endometrial wavelike movements during the menstrual cycle.

Fertil Steril

65

,

746

–749.

Knutzen V, Stratton CJ, Sher G, McNamee PI, Huang TT and Soto-Albors C (

1992

) Mock embryo transfer in early luteal phase, the cycle before in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer: a descriptive study.

Fertil Steril

57

,

156

–162.

Mansour RT and Aboulghar MA (

2002

) Optimizing the embryo transfer technique.

Hum Reprod

17

,

1149

–1153.

Mansour R, Aboulghar M and Serour G (

1990

) Dummy embryo transfer: a technique that minimizes the problems of embryo transfer and improves the pregnancy rate in human in-vitro fertilization.

Fertil Steril

54

,

678

–681.

Mansour RT, Aboulghar MA, Serour GI and Amin YM (

1994

) Dummy embryo transfer using methylene blue dye.

Hum Reprod

9

,

1257

–1259.

Mansour RT, Aboulghar MA, Serour GI, Fahmi I, Ramzy AM and Amin Y (

1996

) Intracytoplasmic sperm injection using microsurgically retrieved epididymal and testicular sperm.

Fertil Steril

65

,

566

–572.

Meldrum DR, Chetkowski R, Steingold KA, de Ziegler D, Cedars MI and Hamilton M (

1987

) Evolution of a highly successful in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer program.

Fertil Steril

48

,

86

–93.

Menezo Y, Anker D and Salat-Baroux J (

1985

) Conception and realization of artificial dyed embryos for training in in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF and ET).

Acta Eur Fertil

16

,

55

–58.

Poindexter AN, 3rd, Thompson DJ, Gibbons WE, Findley WE, Dodson MG and Young RL (

1986

) Residual embryos in failed embryo transfer.

Fertil Steril

46

,

262

–267.

Schulman JD (

1986

) Delayed expulsion of transfer fluid after IVF/ET.

Lancet

1

,

44

.

Woolcott R and Stanger J (

1997

) Potentially important variables identified by transvaginal ultrasound-guided embryo transfer.

Hum Reprod

12

,

963

–966.

Woolcott R and Stanger J (

1998

) Ultrasound tracking of the movement of embryo-associated air bubbles on standing after transfer.

Hum Reprod

13

,

2107

–2109.

Human Reproduction vol. 20 no. 1 © European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology 2004; all rights reserved

Topic:

  • pregnancy
  • bone screws
  • embryo
  • embryo transfer
  • infertility
  • pregnancy rate
  • sperm injections, intracytoplasmic
  • cervix uteri
  • vaginal speculum

Issue Section:

Infertility

Download all slides

Advertisement intended for healthcare professionals

Citations

Views

9,231

Altmetric

More metrics information

Metrics

Total Views 9,231

8,940 Pageviews

291 PDF Downloads

Since 2/1/2017

Month: Total Views:
February 2017 5
March 2017 6
April 2017 2
May 2017 6
June 2017 3
July 2017 3
August 2017 5
September 2017 3
October 2017 10
November 2017 9
December 2017 132
January 2018 127
February 2018 139
March 2018 195
April 2018 215
May 2018 196
June 2018 172
July 2018 157
August 2018 188
September 2018 154
October 2018 120
November 2018 152
December 2018 122
January 2019 112
February 2019 125
March 2019 170
April 2019 209
May 2019 245
June 2019 204
July 2019 230
August 2019 206
September 2019 168
October 2019 113
November 2019 135
December 2019 127
January 2020 146
February 2020 181
March 2020 148
April 2020 106
May 2020 45
June 2020 126
July 2020 119
August 2020 152
September 2020 110
October 2020 85
November 2020 82
December 2020 84
January 2021 65
February 2021 90
March 2021 74
April 2021 108
May 2021 99
June 2021 96
July 2021 91
August 2021 99
September 2021 91
October 2021 99
November 2021 93
December 2021 96
January 2022 87
February 2022 88
March 2022 113
April 2022 155
May 2022 119
June 2022 129
July 2022 134
August 2022 136
September 2022 115
October 2022 144
November 2022 114
December 2022 77
January 2023 94
February 2023 111
March 2023 140
April 2023 82
May 2023 59
June 2023 43
July 2023 50
August 2023 70
September 2023 53
October 2023 88
November 2023 93
December 2023 146
January 2024 55
February 2024 86

Citations

Powered by Dimensions

31 Web of Science

Altmetrics

×

Email alerts

Article activity alert

Advance article alerts

New issue alert

Receive exclusive offers and updates from Oxford Academic

Citing articles via

Google Scholar

  • Most Read

  • Most Cited

ESHRE guideline: number of embryos to transfer during IVF/ICSI
Good practice recommendations on add-ons in reproductive medicine
Recommendations from the 2023 International Evidence-based Guideline for the Assessment and Management of Polycystic Ovary Syndrome
The endometrial microbiota and early pregnancy loss
Two-year efficacy and safety of relugolix combination therapy in women with endometriosis-associated pain: SPIRIT open-label extension study

More from Oxford Academic

Medicine and Health

Reproductive Medicine

Books

Journals

Advertisement intended for healthcare professionals

Minimizing embryo expulsion after embryo transfer: a randomized controlled study (2024)
Top Articles
Latest Posts
Article information

Author: Ouida Strosin DO

Last Updated:

Views: 5900

Rating: 4.6 / 5 (56 voted)

Reviews: 95% of readers found this page helpful

Author information

Name: Ouida Strosin DO

Birthday: 1995-04-27

Address: Suite 927 930 Kilback Radial, Candidaville, TN 87795

Phone: +8561498978366

Job: Legacy Manufacturing Specialist

Hobby: Singing, Mountain biking, Water sports, Water sports, Taxidermy, Polo, Pet

Introduction: My name is Ouida Strosin DO, I am a precious, combative, spotless, modern, spotless, beautiful, precious person who loves writing and wants to share my knowledge and understanding with you.