Low-molecular-weight heparin in thrombophilic women receiving in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection: A meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH) on pregnancy outcomes in thrombophilic women receiving in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI). MATERIAL AND METHODS: A systematic literature search of PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and China National Knowledge Infrastructure was performed to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing LMWH with no treatment or placebo published from database inception until February 19, 2023. Primary outcomes were the clinical pregnancy rate and implantation rate, and secondary outcomes were the live birth rate, miscarriage rate, and the risk of bleeding events. The certainty of the evidence was rated using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) system. Meta-analysis was conducted using STATA 14.0. RESULTS: Five RCTs involving 1094 thrombophilic women receiving IVF/ICSI were finally included. Administration of LMWH was associated with statistically higher clinical pregnancy rate (4 RCTs, risk ratio [RR] 1.50, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.23-1.82, p < 0.001, low certainty evidence), implantation rate (5 RCTs, RR 1.49, 95% CI 1.25-1.78, p < 0.001, very low certainty evidence), and live birth rate (2 RCTs, RR 2.15, 95% CI 1.60-2.89, p < 0.001, very low certainty evidence), but with statistically lower miscarriage rate (2 RCTs, RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.15-0.86, p = 0.021, very low certainty evidence). However, using LMWH was linked to a higher risk of bleeding events (2 RCTs, RR 2.36, 95% CI 1.49-3.74, p < 0.001, very low certainty evidence). CONCLUSIONS: Very low certainty evidence suggests that administration of LMWH may benefit pregnancy outcomes in thrombophilic women receiving IVF/ICSI treatment, although it may also increase the risk of bleeding events. However, before putting our findings into practice, healthcare professionals should conduct an in-depth evaluation of the available evidence and specific patient situations. Furthermore, due to the low methodological quality of the included studies, more high-quality studies are needed to validate our findings in the future.

Retrospective study of pathogens involved in vaginitis among Chinese women.

BACKGROUND: To explore the pathogen distribution in Chinese females with vaginitis. METHODS: This retrospective study included Chinese females with vaginitis admitted at the outpatient department of the Gynecology Clinic of the Second Affiliated Hospital of Kunming Medical University between January 2013 and June 2013. Data on the vaginal pathogens and inflammation were analyzed. RESULTS: The vaginal secretions from 15,601 gynecologic outpatients were abnormal, including 8547 (54.78%) with vaginal infection and 7054 (45.22%) without. In patients with vaginal infections, a single infection was observed in 69.72% (5959/8547) of them, and mixed infection was observed in 30.28% (2588/8547). The differences in age and inflammation grade between the infection and no-infection groups were statistically significant (all P < 0.001). In addition, multiple types of vaginitis could be diagnosed in patients with mixed infections. CONCLUSIONS: About half of the Chinese women with abnormal vaginal secretions are positive for pathogens in the study period. Patients' age and inflammation grade are associated with co-infection. From the public health perspective, this study suggests that the importance of vaginal hygiene should be enforced in Chinese women.

Diagnostic value of colposcopy in patients with cytology-negative and HR-HPV-positive cervical lesions.

PURPOSE: High-risk human papillomavirus (HR-HPV)-positive but cytology-negative cervical cancer screening results are not uncommon. This study aimed to investigate colposcopy's accuracy and diagnostic value in patients with cytology-negative HR-HPV-positive screening results. METHODS: This retrospective study included patients with HR-HPV-positive cytology-negative screening results who underwent electronic colposcopy with acetic acid and multi-point cervical biopsy, HPV typing (24 HPV subtypes), and quantitative HPV detection. RESULTS: Among 229 patients, 130 had chronic cervicitis, and 99 had cervical lesions (CIN1, n = 37; CIN2/3, n = 55; invasive carcinoma, n = 7). Using colposcopy as a reference, the cervical cytology false-negative rate was 43.2% (99/229). Colposcopy was more accurate in patients with HR-HPV16/18 or high viral loads. Multivariable analyses showed HPV viral load and childbearing history were the independent factors affecting the accuracy of colposcopy (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Colposcopy in HR-HPV-positive cytology-negative patients has a moderate diagnostic accuracy. The type of cervical transformation zone and HPV viral load are independent factors affecting the accuracy of colposcopy-based diagnosis.

Comparison of anti-Müllerian hormone and antral follicle count in the prediction of ovarian response: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Increasingly studies reported that the Anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) seems to be a promising and reliable marker of functional ovarian follicle reserve, even better than the AFC test. Our study aimed to conduct a meta-analysis to assess the predictive value of AMH and AFC for predicting poor or high response in IVF treatment. An electronic search was conducted, and the following databases were used: PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library (up to 7 May 2022). The bivariate regression model was used to calculate the pooled sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve. Subgroup analyses and meta-regression also were used in the presented study. Overall performance was assessed by estimating pooled ROC curves between AMH and AFC. RESULTS: Forty-two studies were eligible for this meta-analysis. Comparison of the summary estimates for the prediction of poor or high response showed significant difference in performance for AMH compared with AFC [poor (sensitivity: 0.80 vs 0.74, P < 0.050; specificity: 0.81 vs 0.85, P < 0.001); high (sensitivity: 0.81 vs 0.87, P < 0.001)]. However, there were no significant differences between the ROC curves of AMH and AFC for predicting high (P = 0.835) or poor response (P = 0.567). The cut-off value was a significant source of heterogeneity in the present study. CONCLUSIONS: The present meta-analysis demonstrated that both AMH and AFC have a good predictive ability to the prediction of poor or high responses in IVF treatment.

Single-Dose Versus Multiple-Dose GnRH Agonist for Luteal-Phase Support in Women Undergoing IVF/ICSI Cycles: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Background: Although gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist has been introduced as a beneficial luteal phase support (LPS), the optimal strategy of GnRH agonist remains unclear. This network meta-analysis was therefore performed to determine the comparative efficacy and safety of multiple-dose versus single-dose GnRH agonist protocol for LPS in patients undergoing IVF/ICSI cycles. Methods: We searched relevant studies in PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Registry of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) from their inception util to September 2021. Live birth, clinical pregnancy rate, multiple pregnancy rate, and clinical abortion rate was evaluated. Pairwise and network meta-analysis were conducted using RevMan and ADDIS based on random-effects model, respectively. Moreover, the prioritization of protocols based on ranking probabilities for different outcomes were performed. Results: Sixteen RCTs met our eligibility criteria. Pairwise meta-analysis showed that multiple-dose protocol of GnRH agonist was effective for increasing live birth rate (OR 1.80, 95% CI 1.15 to 2.83, p=0.01) and clinical pregnancy rate (OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.01 to 3.56, p=0.05) as well as decreasing clinical abortion rate (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.90, p=0.02). Meanwhile, single-dose protocol of GnRH agonist was effective for increasing clinical pregnancy rate (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.89, p=0.007) and multiple pregnancy rate (OR 2.55, 95% CI 1.12 to 5.78, p=0.03). However, network meta-analysis only confirmed that multiple-dose protocol of GnRH agonist was the best efficacious strategy for live birth rate (OR 2.04, 95% CrI 1.19 to 3.93) and clinical pregnancy rate (OR 2.10, 95% CrI 1.26 to 3.54). Conclusion: Based on the results of NMA, multiple-dose protocol may be the optimal strategy for patients undergoing IVF/ICSI cycles owing to its advantage in increasing live birth and clinical pregnancy rate. Moreover, single-dose protocol may be the optimal strategy for improving multiple pregnancy rate. However, with the limitations, more RCTs are required to confirm our findings.