Ultrasound‑assessed endometrial receptivity measures for the prediction of in vitro fertilization‑embryo transfer clinical pregnancy outcomes: A meta‑analysis and systematic review

Wu,Jianhang; Sheng,Junfa; Wu,Xiaoying; Wu,Qiumei

doi:10.3892/etm.2023.12152

Ultrasound‑assessed endometrial receptivity measures for the prediction of in vitro fertilization‑embryo transfer clinical pregnancy outcomes: A meta‑analysis and systematic review

Authors:
- Jianhang Wu
- Junfa Sheng
- Xiaoying Wu
- Qiumei Wu
View Affiliations

Affiliations: Department of Ultrasound, Fujian Maternity and Child Health Hospital, Fuzhou, Fujian 350000, P.R. China
Published online on: August 3, 2023 https://doi.org/10.3892/etm.2023.12152
Article Number: 453
Copyright: © Wu et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution License.

Metrics: Total Views: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Metrics: Total PDF Downloads: 0 (Spandidos Publications: | PMC Statistics: )

Cited By (CrossRef): 0 citations Loading Articles...

Abstract

At present, there are currently no reliable and consistent conclusions regarding transvaginal ultrasound assessment of endometrial receptivity in predicting clinical pregnancy outcomes of in vitro fertilization‑embryo transfer (IVF‑ET). Thus, in the present study, a meta‑analysis was performed on multiple endometrial receptivity indices detected by vaginal ultrasound, aiming to provide a diagnostic basis for clinical practice. PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched for studies published between the establishment of the databases through to January 2023. Studies that reported infertile women undergoing IVF‑ET and undergoing vaginal ultrasound were included, but repeat publication, studies where the full text was not obtainable, studies where there was incomplete information provided or data extraction was not possible, studies on animals, case reports, reviews, and systematic reviews were excluded. STATA 15.1 was used to analyze the data. The pooled results showed that the endometrial thickness [Weighted mean difference (WMD)=0.03, 95% CI: 0.00‑0.06; P=0.022] and endometrial volume (WMD=0.41, 95% CI: 0.07‑0.74; P=0.017) of the pregnancy group after receiving IVF‑ET were all significantly higher than that of the non‑pregnancy group. The pooled results also showed that the vascularization index (VI) (WMD=0.79, 95% CI: 0.56‑1.03; P=0.000), flow index (FI) (WMD=1.82, 95% CI: 0.83‑2.81; P=0.000) and vascularization flow index (VFI) (WMD=1.58, 95% CI: 0.91‑2.24; P=0.000) of the pregnancy group after receiving IVF‑ET was significantly higher than that of the non‑pregnancy group. Systolic/diastolic (S/D) (WMD=‑4.92, 95%CI: ‑8.28‑ ‑1.56; P=0.004) of the uterine artery of the pregnancy group after receiving IVF‑ET was significantly lower than that of the non‑pregnancy group. However, the differences between the resistance index (RI) and pulsatility index (PI) in the pregnancy group vs. the non‑pregnancy group after receiving IVF‑ET were not statistically significant. Vaginal ultrasound can be used to predict the outcomes of pregnancy in infertile women undergoing IVF‑ET by measuring the thickness and volume of the endometrium, combined with the S/D, VI, FI, and VFI of the uterine artery.

View Figures

View References

1	Ahmadi A, Ramazanzadeh R, Derakhshan S, Khodabandehloo M, Farhadifar F, Roshani D, Mousavi A, Hedayati MA and Taheri M: Prevalence of Listeria monocytogenes infection in women with spontaneous abortion, normal delivery, fertile and infertile. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 22(974)2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
2	Zhu F, Zhao B, Wu J, Yin S, Ma T, Li Z, Zhu X, Wang T, Yang B and Che D: Effect of transcutaneous electrical acupoint stimulation on pregnancy outcomes in women with in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Front Cell Dev Biol. 10(1068894)2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
3	Wang J, Xia F, Zhou Y, Wei X, Zhuang Y and Huang Y: Association between endometrial/subendometrial vasculature and embryo transfer outcome: A meta-analysis and subgroup analysis. J Ultrasound Med. 37:149–163. 2018.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
4	de Ziegler D, Fanchin R, de Moustier B and Bulletti C: The hormonal control of endometrial receptivity: Estrogen (E2) and progesterone. J Reprod Immunol. 39:149–166. 1998.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
5	Liu S, Hong L, Lian R, Xiao S, Li Y, Diao L and Zeng Y: Transcriptomic analysis reveals endometrial dynamics in normoweight and overweight/obese polycystic ovary syndrome women. Front Genet. 13(874487)2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
6	Zhang D, Xu G, Zhang R, Zhu Y, Gao H, Zhou C, Sheng J and Huang H: Decreased expression of aquaporin 2 is associated with impaired endometrial receptivity in controlled ovarian stimulation. Reprod Fertil Dev. 28:499–506. 2016.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
7	Wang W, Feng D and Ling B: Biologia Futura: Endometrial microbiome affects endometrial receptivity from the perspective of the endometrial immune microenvironment. Biol Futur. 73:291–300. 2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
8	Elsokkary M, Eldin AB, Abdelhafez M, Rateb A, Samy M, Eldorf A, Islam BA, Raafat TA, Gomaa IA, Taema M, et al: The reproducibility of the novel utilization of five-dimensional ultrasound and power Doppler in the prediction of endometrial receptivity in intracytoplasmic sperm-injected women: A pilot prospective clinical study. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 299:551–558. 2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
9	Zhou Q, Yan G, Ding L, Liu J, Yu X, Kong S, Zhang M, Wang Z, Liu Y, Jiang Y, et al: EHD1 impairs decidualization by regulating the Wnt4/β-catenin signaling pathway in recurrent implantation failure. EBioMedicine. 50:343–354. 2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
10	Basatvat S, Russell JM, Saare M, Thurston LM, Salumets A and Fazeli A: Potential innate immunity-related markers of endometrial receptivity and recurrent implantation failure (RIF). Reprod Biol. 21(100569)2021.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
11	Haas J and Casper RF: Observations on clinical assessment of endometrial receptivity. Fertil Steril. 118:828–831. 2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
12	Cheng F, Xv BM, Liu YL, Sun R, Wang L and Yi JL: Endometrial microstimulation effects on endometrial receptivity assessed by transvaginal color Doppler sonography. BMC Womens Health. 22(508)2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
13	Zhang CH, Chen C, Wang JR, Wang Y, Wen SX, Cao YP and Qian WP: An endometrial receptivity scoring system basing on the endometrial thickness, volume, echo, peristalsis, and blood flow evaluated by ultrasonography. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 13(907874)2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
14	Cook DA and Reed DA: Appraising the quality of medical education research methods: The medical education research study quality instrument and the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale-education. Acad Med. 90:1067–1076. 2015.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
15	Bernardo WM: PRISMA statement and PROSPERO. Int Braz J Urol. 43:383–384. 2017.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
16	Zhang Q, Wang X, Zhang Y, Lu H and Yu Y: Nomogram prediction for the prediction of clinical pregnancy in freeze-thawed embryo transfer. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 22(629)2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
17	Crosby DA, Glover LE, Downey P, Mooney EE, McAuliffe FM, O'Farrelly C, Brennan DJ and Wingfield M: Mid-luteal uterine artery Doppler indices in the prediction of pregnancy outcome in nulliparous women undergoing assisted reproduction. Hum Fertil (Camb). 25:670–676. 2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
18	Tong R, Zhou Y, He Q, Zhuang Y, Zhou W and Xia F: Analysis of the guidance value of 3D ultrasound in evaluating endometrial receptivity for frozen-thawed embryo transfer in patients with repeated implantation failure. Ann Transl Med. 8(944)2020.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
19	Long Y, Liang R and Zhang J, Fang F, Cheng C, Lu Q and Zhang J: Identification and characterization of uterine micro-peristalsis in women undergoing in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer via dynamic ultrasound features. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 300:1729–1739. 2019.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
20	Koo HS, Park CW, Cha SH and Yang KM: Serial evaluation of endometrial blood flow for prediction of pregnancy outcomes in patients who underwent controlled ovarian hyperstimulation and in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer. J Ultrasound Med. 37:851–857. 2018.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
21	Prasad S, Goyal R, Kumar Y, Nayar P, Hajela S, Kumaran A, Vairagi R and Chauhan S: The relationship between uterine artery two-dimensional color Doppler measurement and pregnancy outcome: A prospective observational study. J Reprod Infertil. 18:251–256. 2017.PubMed/NCBI
22	Son JB, Jeong JE, Joo JK, Na YJ, Kim CW and Lee KS: Measurement of endometrial and uterine vascularity by transvaginal ultrasonography in predicting pregnancy outcome during frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles. J Obstet Gynaecol Res. 40:1661–1667. 2014.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
23	Zhao J, Zhang Q, Wang Y and Li Y: Endometrial pattern, thickness and growth in predicting pregnancy outcome following 3319 IVF cycle. Reprod Biomed Online. 29:291–298. 2014.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
24	Nandi A, Martins WP, Jayaprakasan K, Clewes JS, Campbell BK and Raine-Fenning NJ: Assessment of endometrial and subendometrial blood flow in women undergoing frozen embryo transfer cycles. Reprod Biomed Online. 28:343–351. 2014.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
25	Engels V, Sanfrutos L, Pérez-Medina T, Álvarez P, Zapardiel I, Bueno B, Godoy-Tundidor S and Bajo-Arenas JM: Evaluation of endometrial and subendometrial vascularization and endometrial volume by 3-D power Doppler ultrasound and its relationship with age and pregnancy in intrauterine insemination cycles. Gynecol Obstet Invest. 72:117–122. 2011.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
26	Zácková T, Järvelä IY, Tapanainen JS and Feyereisl J: Assessment of endometrial and ovarian characteristics using three dimensional power Doppler ultrasound to predict response in frozen embryo transfer cycles. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 7(151)2009.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
27	Mercé LT, Barco MJ, Bau S and Troyano J: Are endometrial parameters by three-dimensional ultrasound and power Doppler angiography related to in vitro fertilization/embryo transfer outcome? Fertil Steril. 89:111–117. 2008.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
28	Chien LW, Lee WS, Au HK and Tzeng CR: Assessment of changes in utero-ovarian arterial impedance during the peri-implantation period by Doppler sonography in women undergoing assisted reproduction. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 23:496–500. 2004.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
29	Wu HM, Chiang CH, Huang HY, Chao AS, Wang HS and Soong YK: Detection of the subendometrial vascularization flow index by three-dimensional ultrasound may be useful for predicting the pregnancy rate for patients undergoing in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer. Fertil Steril. 79:507–511. 2003.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
30	Schild RL, Knobloch C, Dorn C, Fimmers R, van der Ven H and Hansmann M: Endometrial receptivity in an in vitro fertilization program as assessed by spiral artery blood flow, endometrial thickness, endometrial volume, and uterine artery blood flow. Fertil Steril. 75:361–366. 2001.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar
31	Li YW, Liang XW, Fang JH and Chen ZY: Application of ultrasound markers measured at different time points of COH cycle in the prediction of ovarian response for individualised ovulation induction. J Obstet Gynaecol. 42:1467–1473. 2022.PubMed/NCBI View Article : Google Scholar