The Role of Self-Management in Pessary Therapy for Pelvic Organ Prolapse-A retrospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: This study investigated pessary self-management (PSM). The primary outcome was how often PSM was taught to patients with pelvic organ prolapse (POP). Secondary outcomes were associations of PSM with treatment continuation, side effects, changing to surgery, and number of doctor consultations in the first year after treatment initiation compared with clinical management (CM). METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted in 300 patients visiting three Dutch medical centres in 2019, and receiving a pessary for POP. The t test, Chi-squared test and logistic regression were performed to compare PSM with CM and to identify factors associated with treatment continuation. RESULTS: A total of 35% of patients received PSM instructions, of which 92% were able to perform PSM successfully. Treatment was continued by 83% of patients practicing PSM and 75% of patients having CM (p = 0.16), side effects occurred in 26% and 39% respectively (p = 0.18). Pain or discomfort was associated with treatment discontinuation (p < 0.01). In a subgroup analysis of patients who had a pessary suitable for PSM, treatment continuation was significantly higher in the PSM group (97%) than in the CM group (74%; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Pessary self-management was only taught to 35% of patients who received a pessary, although the ability to perform PSM was high (92%). Treatment discontinuation was significantly lower in the PSM subgroup, when assessing the subgroup of patients using a pessary suitable for PSM. The large number of patients using a pessary suitable for PSM in the CM group implies that there is a lot to gain by promoting PSM.

Cost-Effectiveness of perioperative Vaginally Administered estrogen in postmenopausal women undergoing prolapse surgery (EVA trial): study protocol for a multicenter double-blind randomized placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Surgery for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) is associated with high recurrence rates. The costs associated with the treatment of recurrent POP are huge, and the burden from women who encounter recurrent POP, negatively impacts their quality of life. Estrogen therapy might improve surgical outcome for POP due to its potential beneficial effects. It is thought that vaginal estrogen therapy improves healing and long-term maintenance of connective tissue integrity. Hence, this study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of perioperative vaginal estrogen therapy in postmenopausal women undergoing POP surgery. METHODS: The EVA trial is a multi-center double-blind randomized placebo-controlled trial conducted in the Netherlands comparing the effectiveness and costs-effectiveness of vaginal estrogen therapy. This will be studied in 300 postmenopausal women undergoing primary POP surgery, with a POP-Q stage of ≥ 2. After randomization, participants administer vaginal estrogen cream or placebo cream from 4 to 6 weeks preoperative until 12 months postoperative. The primary outcome is subjective improvement of POP symptoms at 1 year follow-up, measured with the Patient Global Impression of Improvement (PGI-I) scale. Secondary outcomes are POP-Q anatomy in all compartments, re-interventions, surgery related complications, general and disease specific quality of life, sexual function, signs and complaints of vaginal atrophy, vaginal pH, adverse events, costs, and adherence to treatment. Follow up is scheduled at 6 weeks, 6 months and 12 months postoperative. Data will be collected using validated questionnaires and out-patient visits including gynecological examination performed by an independent gynecologist. DISCUSSION: This study investigates whether perioperative vaginal estrogen will be cost-effective in the surgical treatment of POP in postmenopausal women. It is hypothesized that estrogen therapy will show a reduction in recurrent POP symptoms and a reduction in reoperations for POP, with subsequent improved quality of life among women and cost savings. Trial registrationNetherlands Trial Registry: NL6853; registered 19-02-2018, https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/6853 . EudraCT: 2017-003144-21; registered: 24-07-2017.

Partially absorbable mesh or native tissue repair for pelvic organ prolapse: a randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: The objective was to compare medium-term efficacy and safety of a partially absorbable mesh kit and native tissue repair in pelvic organ prolapse (POP). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Women with primary POP stage ≥ II were randomized to transvaginal trocar-guided partially absorbable mesh (81 women) or native tissue repair (82 women). Primary outcome was overall anatomical success (POP < stage II) at 24 months. Secondary outcomes were composite success, global improvement, and adverse events. RESULTS: Sixty-nine (85%) of the women allocated to partially absorbable mesh underwent mesh surgery; 8 (10%) crossed over to native tissue repair and 4 women (5%) withdrew from the study. Eighty (98%) of the women allocated to native tissue repair underwent the assigned treatment and 2 (2%) withdrew. Twenty-four months later, 140 surgically treated women (89%) demonstrated an overall anatomical success of 39%; 45% (32 out of 71 women) for mesh, and 32% (22 out of 69) for native tissue repair (RR 1.4, 95% CI 0.92 to 2.2). Composite success was 88 and 73% respectively (RR: 1.1, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.4). There was global improvement in 86% (48 out of 56 women) in the mesh group and in 77% (47 out of 60 women) in the native tissue group (RR: 1.1, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.3). Four women were diagnosed with mesh exposure at 2 years (6%). CONCLUSION: At 24 months, no significant anatomical or composite benefit of partially absorbable mesh over native tissue repair could be demonstrated in women who had been surgically treated for primary POP.

A revised prediction model for natural conception.

One of the aims in reproductive medicine is to differentiate between couples that have favourable chances of conceiving naturally and those that do not. Since the development of the prediction model of Hunault, characteristics of the subfertile population have changed. The objective of this analysis was to assess whether additional predictors can refine the Hunault model and extend its applicability. Consecutive subfertile couples with unexplained and mild male subfertility presenting in fertility clinics were asked to participate in a prospective cohort study. We constructed a multivariable prediction model with the predictors from the Hunault model and new potential predictors. The primary outcome, natural conception leading to an ongoing pregnancy, was observed in 1053 women of the 5184 included couples (20%). All predictors of the Hunault model were selected into the revised model plus an additional seven (woman's body mass index, cycle length, basal FSH levels, tubal status,history of previous pregnancies in the current relationship (ongoing pregnancies after natural conception, fertility treatment or miscarriages), semen volume, and semen morphology. Predictions from the revised model seem to concur better with observed pregnancy rates compared with the Hunault model; c-statistic of 0.71 (95% CI 0.69 to 0.73) compared with 0.59 (95% CI 0.57 to 0.61).

Semen analysis and prediction of natural conception.

STUDY QUESTION: Do two semen analyses predict natural conception better than a single semen analysis and will adding the results of repeated semen analyses to a prediction model for natural pregnancy improve predictions? SUMMARY ANSWER: A second semen analysis does not add helpful information for predicting natural conception compared with using the results of a single semen analysis and addition of the second analysis to a prediction model for natural conception did not improve predictions. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: A major problem with semen analyses is the large variability of results within an individual. High-quality evidence is lacking on how many semen analyses need to be performed during the fertility workup to achieve an accurate prediction of conception. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: We conducted a prospective cohort study of 897 consecutive couples presenting with subfertility in two university hospitals in the period 2002-2004 in the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, AND METHODS: The laboratories scored sperm parameters according to the 1999 WHO criteria. Sperm concentration was counted and motility was assessed in a Makler counting chamber at a magnification of ×200. All assessments were performed by trained laboratory technicians. Follow-up started at the completion of the infertility workup and ended after 12 months. Primary end-point was natural conception resulting in an ongoing pregnancy. We constructed models for three strategies for the prediction of natural conception, using univariable and multivariable Cox hazard regression analyses. We evaluated the performance of the three strategies by comparing goodness-of-fit, discrimination and calibration. First, we analysed the semen parameters only. Secondly, we analysed the semen parameters in addition to the multivariable Hunault prediction model. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Of the 897 couples, 132 (15%) achieved a pregnancy by natural conception. Using the results of a single semen analysis only, the calculated probabilities of natural conception within 12 months across the study population ranged from 0.12 to 0.38, with a median of 0.16 (IQR: 0.16-0.17). Using the results of two semen analyses did not lead to a better goodness-of-fit. Discriminative capacity was rather poor, with an area under the ROC curve (AUC) ranging from 0.51 to 0.56. Using the Hosmer-Lemeshow test statistic we found no signs of poor calibration. Using the results of two semen analyses in combination with the Hunault model did not significantly increase goodness-of-fit compared with using a single semen analysis. The Hunault model with the addition of the semen parameters fitted the data significantly better than the Hunault model itself (difference in -2 Log likelihood: 13; 3 df; P = 0.002). Using the Hosmer-Lemeshow test statistic we found no signs of poor calibration. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The academic setting possibly explains the relatively low natural conception rates, with only 15% achieving a natural conception within 1 year. Men with azoospermia were excluded. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Performing more than one semen analysis will not increase the prognostic power of the test in clinical practice. Adding the first semen analysis to the Hunault model for the prediction of natural conception improved performance significantly compared with using the Hunault model alone. External validation, in other populations, should follow to confirm our conclusions, and to evaluate the generalizability or transportability of the extended Hunault model. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): No external funding was involved in this study. None of the authors has any conflict of interest to declare.

Long-term outcome in couples with unexplained subfertility and an intermediate prognosis initially randomized between expectant management and immediate treatment.

BACKGROUND: We recently reported that treatment with intrauterine insemination and controlled ovarian stimulation (IUI-COS) did not increase ongoing pregnancy rates compared with expectant management (EM) in couples with unexplained subfertility and intermediate prognosis of natural conception. Long-term cost-effectiveness of a policy of initial EM is unknown. We investigated whether the recommendation not to treat during the first 6 months is valid, regarding the long-term effectiveness and cumulative costs. METHODS: Couples with unexplained subfertility and intermediate prognosis of natural conception (n=253, at 26 public clinics, the Netherlands) were randomly allocated to 6 months EM or immediate start with IUI-COS. The couples were then treated according to local protocol, usually IUI-COS followed by IVF. We followed couples until 3 years after randomization and registered pregnancies and resources used. Primary outcome was time to ongoing pregnancy. Secondary outcome was treatment costs. Analysis was by intention-to-treat. Economic evaluation was performed from the perspective of the health care institution. RESULTS: Time to ongoing pregnancy did not differ between groups (log-rank test P=0.98). Cumulative ongoing pregnancy rates were 72-73% for EM and IUI-COS groups, respectively [relative risk 0.99 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.85-1.1)]. Estimated mean costs per couple were € 3424 (95% CI € 880-€ 5968) in the EM group and € 6040 (95% CI € 4055-€ 8125) in the IUI-COS group resulting in an estimated saving of € 2616 per couple (95% CI € 385-€ 4847) in favour of EM. CONCLUSIONS: In couples with unexplained subfertility and an intermediate prognosis of natural conception, initial EM for 6 months results in a considerable cost-saving with no delay in achieving pregnancy or jeopardizing the chance of pregnancy. Further comparisons between aggressive and milder forms of ovarian stimulation should be performed.

Intrauterine insemination: how many cycles should we perform?

BACKGROUND: In the past 20 years, various recommendations have been made about the maximum number of intrauterine insemination (IUI) cycles that should be performed, because evidence underpinning a possible limit is lacking. METHODS: We performed a multicentre, retrospective cohort analysis among couples treated with IUI up to nine cycles. Primary outcome measure was ongoing pregnancy rate (OPR) per cycle. Cumulative OPRs (COPR) after three, six and nine cycles of IUI were calculated using life-table analysis. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analysis was performed to identify variables possibly affecting OPR's. RESULTS: Overall, 3714 couples with male, cervical or unexplained subfertility underwent 15,303 cycles of IUI. In 70% of cycles, controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) was used (51% clomiphene-citrate, 19% gonadotropins). Mean OPR rate was 5.6% per cycle. OPR in the seventh, eighth and ninth cycle were 5.1%, 6.7% and 4.6%, respectively. Taking censored patients into account, the calculated COPR was 18% after the third cycle, 30% after the seventh cycle and 41% after the ninth cycle. If censored patients were considered to have no chance of conception, a crude COPR of 25% after nine cycles was found. Multivariable regression analysis showed no significant impact of age, type of subfertility, diagnosis, use of hyperstimulation or cycle number on OPR after the sixth treatment cycle. CONCLUSIONS: OPR in high-order IUI cycles are acceptable, and do not offer a rationale for cancellation before nine cycles. Using this type of very mild COH, it may be reasonable to conduct up to nine cycles.

Obesity affects spontaneous pregnancy chances in subfertile, ovulatory women.

BACKGROUND: Obesity is increasing rapidly among women all over the world. Obesity is a known risk factor for subfertility due to anovulation, but it is unknown whether obesity also affects spontaneous pregnancy chances in subfertile, ovulatory women. METHODS: We evaluated whether obesity affected the chance of a spontaneous pregnancy in a prospectively assembled cohort of 3029 consecutive subfertile couples. Women had to be ovulatory and had to have at least one patent tube, whereas men had to have a normal semen analysis. Time to spontaneous ongoing pregnancy within 12 months was the primary endpoint. RESULTS: The probability of a spontaneous pregnancy declined linearly with a body mass index (BMI) over 29 kg/m(2). Corrected for possible related factors, women with a high BMI had a 4% lower pregnancy rate per kg/m(2) increase [hazard ratio: 0.96 (95% CI 0.91-0.99)]. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate that obesity is associated with lower pregnancy rates in subfertile ovulatory women.

A prediction model for ongoing pregnancy after in vitro fertilization in couples with male subfertility.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the predictive capacity of male and female characteristics on in vitro fertilization (IVF) outcome in couples with male subfertility and to construct an IVF prediction model. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a cohort study including all couples with male subfertility undergoing IVF. The main outcome measure was an ongoing pregnancy after IVF. The baseline characteristics from a couple including parameters of the semen-analysis were included in a univariable and multivariable analysis to construct a prediction model (model I). The addition of antisperm antibodies (ASA) and post-wash total motile count (TMC) to models I, II and III, respectively, were analyzed. RESULTS: We included 275 couples with male subfertility who underwent 473 IVF cycles with an ongoing pregnancy rate of 19% per cycle. A prediction model containing female age, secondary subfertility, percentage progressively motile sperm, percentage sperm with normal morphology, prewash total motile sperm count, bilateral tubal pathology, history of intrauterine insemination and cycle number was constructed (model I). Prediction with model I resulted in the selection of 95 couples, of whom 55 conceived (pregnancy rate of 28% per cycle). Use of the model with n ASA (Model II) resulted in the selection of 79 couples, of whom still 55 conceived (30% per cycle). CONCLUSION: In couples with male subfertility, the use of a prediction model including ASA improves the efficiency of IVF.

Predictive value and clinical impact of Basal follicle-stimulating hormone in subfertile, ovulatory women.

CONTEXT: Basal FSH is a marker for ovarian reserve. OBJECTIVES: The objective of the study was to investigate the predictive value of basal FSH on spontaneous ongoing pregnancy in subfertile ovulatory women. DESIGN: This was a prospective cohort study. SETTING: The study was conducted in 19 fertility centers in The Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS: Subfertile ovulatory women without two-sided tubal pathology and in whom the man had normal sperm parameters (total motile count > or = 3 x10(6)) participated in the study. INTERVENTIONS: Interventions included a fertility work-up, including a basal FSH measurement on cycle d 3. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Spontaneous ongoing pregnancy was measured. RESULTS: We included 3519 consecutive couples of which 562 (16%) had a spontaneous ongoing pregnancy within 1 yr. Basal FSH levels of 8 IU/liter or higher were associated with a decreased probability of spontaneous ongoing pregnancy [hazard ratio (HR) 0.93/IU.liter (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.87-0.98)]. In a multivariable analysis, female age (HR 0.97/yr, 95% CI 0.95-0.99), cycle length (HR 0.96/d, 95% CI 0.93-1.0), and FSH levels 8 IU/liter or greater (HR 0.93/IU.liter, 95% CI 0.87-0.99) were strong negative predictors for spontaneous ongoing pregnancy. Addition of FSH to a prediction model based on female age, duration of subfertility, previous pregnancy, referral status, and semen analysis changed the probability to conceive spontaneously from 30% or greater to less than 30% in 97 of 3219 couples (3.0%). CONCLUSIONS: In ovulatory women, a basal FSH level of 8 IU/liter or higher is associated with decreasing fecundity, independent of female age and cycle length. Because the number of couples in whom the FSH level alters management decisions is low, we do not recommend routine testing of basal FSH in subfertile couples.

Intrauterine insemination with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation versus expectant management for couples with unexplained subfertility and an intermediate prognosis: a randomised clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Intrauterine insemination with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation is commonly used as first-line treatment for couples with unexplained subfertility. Since such treatment increases the risk of multiple pregnancy, a couple's chances of achieving an ongoing pregnancy without it should be considered to identify those most likely to benefit from treatment. We aimed to assess the incremental effectiveness of intrauterine insemination with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation compared with expectant management in couples with unexplained subfertility and an intermediate prognosis of a spontaneous ongoing pregnancy. METHODS: 253 couples with unexplained subfertility and a 30-40% probability of a spontaneous ongoing pregnancy within 12 months were randomly assigned either intrauterine insemination with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation for 6 months or expectant management for 6 months. The primary endpoint of this hospital-based study was ongoing pregnancy within 6 months. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is registered with the Dutch Trial Register and as an International Standard Randomised Clinical Trial, number ISRCTN72675518. FINDINGS: Of the 253 couples enrolled, 127 were assigned intrauterine insemination with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation and 126 expectant management. In the intervention group, 42 (33%) women conceived and 29 (23%) pregnancies were ongoing. In the expectant management group, 40 (32%) women conceived and 34 (27%) pregnancies were ongoing (relative risk 0.85, 95% CI 0.63-1.1). There was one twin pregnancy in each study group, and one woman in the intervention group conceived triplets. INTERPRETATION: A large beneficial effect of intrauterine insemination with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in couples with unexplained subfertility and an intermediate prognosis can be excluded. Expectant management for 6 months is therefore justified in these couples.

Reducing Inter-Laboratory Differences between Semen Analyses Using Z Score and Regression Transformations.

BACKGROUND: Standardization of the semen analysis may improve reproducibility. We assessed variability between laboratories in semen analyses and evaluated whether a transformation using Z scores and regression statistics was able to reduce this variability. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study. We calculated between-laboratory coefficients of variation (CVB) for sperm concentration and for morphology. Subsequently, we standardized the semen analysis results by calculating laboratory specific Z scores, and by using regression. We used analysis of variance for four semen parameters to assess systematic differences between laboratories before and after the transformations, both in the circulation samples and in the samples obtained in the prospective cohort study in the Netherlands between January 2002 and February 2004. RESULTS: The mean CVBwas 7% for sperm concentration (range 3 to 13%) and 32% for sperm morphology (range 18 to 51%). The differences between the laboratories were statistically significant for all semen parameters (all P<0.001). Standardization using Z scores did not reduce the differences in semen analysis results between the laboratories (all P<0.001). CONCLUSION: There exists large between-laboratory variability for sperm morphology and small, but statistically significant, between-laboratory variation for sperm concentration. Standardization using Z scores does not eliminate between-laboratory variability.

Prediction of an ongoing pregnancy after intrauterine insemination.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a prognostic model for the outcome of IUI. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Four fertility centers in The Netherlands. PATIENT(S): Couples of whom the female partners had a regular cycle and who had been treated with IUI. INTERVENTION(S): Intrauterine insemination with and without ovarian hyperstimulation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Ongoing pregnancy. RESULT(S): Overall, 3371 couples were included who underwent 14968 cycles. There were 1229 (8.2%) pregnancies, of which 1000 (6.7%) pregnancies were ongoing. Logistic regression analysis demonstrated that increasing maternal age, longer duration of subfertility, presence of male factor subfertility, one-sided tubal pathology, endometriosis, uterine anomalies, and an increasing number of cycles were unfavorable predictors for an ongoing pregnancy. Cervical factor and the use of ovarian hyperstimulation were favorable predictors. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.59. When couples were divided into four categories based on prognosis, the difference between the predicted and observed chance, that is, the calibration, was less than 0.5% in each of the four groups. CONCLUSION(S): Although our model had a relatively poor discriminative capacity, data on calibration showed that the selected prognostic factors allow distinction between couples with a poor prognosis and couples with a good prognosis. After external validation, this model could be of use in patient counseling and clinical decision making.

Long term outcome in subfertile couples with isolated cervical factor.

OBJECTIVE: A previous randomized clinical trial (RCT) compared immediate treatment with intrauterine insemination (IUI) to expectant management for six months in subfertile couples with an isolated cervical factor. That study showed higher ongoing pregnancy rates in couples receiving intrauterine insemination. The current study compared the long-term effectiveness and costs of this intervention. STUDY DESIGN: We followed all couples (N=99) who were previously included in the RCT for three years after randomization and registered pregnancies and treatments. After the initial trial period, couples in both groups were offered further treatment according to local protocol. The primary outcome was an ongoing pregnancy after three years. RESULTS: After three years, there were 36 ongoing pregnancies in the immediate IUI group (N=51 couples) and 38 ongoing pregnancies in the expectant management group (N=48 couples). The ongoing pregnancy rates were 71% and 79% respectively (RR 0.89 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.7-1.1)). CONCLUSIONS: In couples with an isolated cervical factor, a treatment strategy including immediate treatment with IUI does not result in higher ongoing pregnancy rates on the long term. Initial expectant management is therefore justified in these couples and identifying a cervical factor by a post-coital test is unnecessary.

Couples dropping out of a reimbursed intrauterine insemination program: what is their prognostic profile and why do they drop out?

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate whether baseline characteristics and prognostic profiles differed between couples who drop out from intrauterine insemination (IUI) and couples that continue IUI, and the reasons for couples dropping out from IUI programs. DESIGN: Retrospective observational cohort study. SETTING: Fertility centers. PATIENT(S): Consecutive subfertile couples undergoing IUI. INTERVENTION(S): None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Characteristics and prognosis of ongoing pregnancy after IUI at the start of treatment of couples that dropped out compared with couples that continued treatment or achieved an ongoing pregnancy. RESULT(S): We studied 803 couples who underwent 3,579 IUI cycles of whom 221 couples dropped out (28%). Couples dropping out completed 2.8 (SD ±1.4) cycles per couple compared with 4.5 (SD ±2.3) cycles per couple for those continuing treatment. Couples dropping out had a higher female age, longer subfertility duration, and higher basal FSH. Mean prognosis to achieve an ongoing pregnancy after IUI at start of treatment was 7.9% (SD ±2.4) per cycle for couples who dropped out and 8.5% (SD ±2.5) per cycle for couples continuing treatment. Of the dropouts, 100 couples (45%) were actively censored from the IUI program, 87 couples (39%) because of poor prognosis; 121 couples (55%) were passively censored from the program, of whom 62 (28%) dropped out owing to personal reasons; 59 couples (27%) were lost to follow-up. CONCLUSION(S): We found significant differences in prognostic profile between couples continuing treatment and couples dropping out, although these differences seem limited from a clinical perspective. We conclude that overestimation of ongoing pregnancy rates after IUI due to couples dropping out is limited.

Couples with unexplained subfertility and unfavorable prognosis: a randomized pilot trial comparing the effectiveness of in vitro fertilization with elective single embryo transfer versus intrauterine insemination with controlled ovarian stimulation.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of IVF with elective single embryo transfer (IVF-eSET) vs. IUI with controlled ovarian stimulation (IUI-COS) as an alternative treatment to reduce the risk for a multiple pregnancy. DESIGN: Randomized pilot trial. SETTING: Three academic and six teaching hospitals in the Netherlands. PATIENT(S): Couples with unexplained or mild male subfertility and an unfavorable prognosis for natural conception. INTERVENTION(S): One cycle of IVF-eSET or three cycles of IUI-COS. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Ongoing pregnancy per couple. RESULT(S): We randomly allocated 116 women to IVF-eSET (n = 58) or IUI-COH (n = 58). There were 14 ongoing pregnancies (24%) in the IVF-eSET group and 12 pregnancies (21%) in the IUI-COS group (relative ratio 1.17; 95% confidence interval 0.60-2.30). There were two twin pregnancies in the IVF-eSET group (14%) and two twin pregnancies and one triplet pregnancy in the IUI-COH group (25%). CONCLUSION(S): In patients with unexplained or mild male subfertility and a poor prognosis for natural conception, one cycle of IVF-eSET might be as effective as three cycles of IUI-COS as primary treatment. Elective single embryo transfer does not seem an effective strategy in preventing multiple pregnancies in this particular population. In the future a strict SET policy (i.e., compulsory SET) might be an option. Our trial provides evidence for the feasibility and highlights the importance of a large definitive trial to determine the effectiveness and side effects of both strategies.

Prognostic value of the postcoital test for spontaneous pregnancy.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the capacity of the postcoital test (PCT) to predict spontaneous pregnancy in a large cohort study of subfertile couples. DESIGN: Prospective study. SETTING: Department of reproductive medicine of 38 hospitals in the Netherlands. PATIENT(S): Between January 2002 and February 2004, we prospectively included consecutive subfertile couples who had not been evaluated previously for subfertility. INTERVENTION(S): We estimated the contribution of the PCT result to the existing prediction model for spontaneous pregnancy by calculating the adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of an abnormal PCT result. We constructed a second prediction model (PCT model) based on the reference model including the PCT. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Primary endpoint in this study was ongoing pregnancy. We evaluated the performance of the PCT model in comparison with the reference model by calculating goodness of fit, discrimination, calibration, and the "net reclassification improvement". RESULT(S): We included 3,021 couples of whom 537 (18%) had a spontaneous pregnancy and 55 (1.8%) a nonsuccessful pregnancy; 1,316 (44%) started treatment within 12 months, 824 (27%) neither started treatment nor became pregnant, and 289 (10%) became lost to follow-up within 12 months. The adjusted HR for an abnormal PCT was 0.76 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.62 to 0.94). The adjusted HR for an abnormal PCT was 0.63 (95% CI: 0.47 to 0.84) in case of no spermatozoa, 0.81 (95% CI: 0.57 to 1.2) in case of nonmotile spermatozoa, and 1.2 (95% CI: 0.8 to 1.8) in case of motile, nonprogressive spermatozoa. Adding the PCT result to the reference model did not improve goodness of fit. Discrimination was equally poor for the PCT model and the reference model. The calibration plots of both models showed comparably good calibration. The net reclassification improvement of the predictions of the PCT model compared with the reference model was -1.1%. CONCLUSION(S): This study demonstrated that the PCT has prognostic value but does not add substantially to a prognostic model for spontaneous pregnancy.

Role of semen analysis in subfertile couples.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the associations between the results of the male partner's semen analysis (classified according to the World Health Organization [WHO] criteria) and fathering a child without any treatment. DESIGN: Prospective multicenter cohort study. SETTING: Twenty subfertility centers in The Netherlands. PATIENT(S): A total of 3,345 consecutive couples presenting for subfertility. INTERVENTION(S): None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Associations between the results of the male partner's semen analysis, classified according to the WHO criteria, and fathering a child without any treatment within a time horizon of 1 year. Subsequently, we redefined semen quality criteria and reevaluated the associations. RESULT(S): Follow-up data of 3,129 couples (94%) were available, of which 517 (17%) had a healthy pregnancy without treatment. The 1-year pregnancy rate in men with WHO normozoospermia did not differ significantly from that in men with WHO impaired semen (24% vs. 23%). In contrast, we observed lower chances of fathering a child for sperm concentrations <40 × 10(6)/mL, total sperm count <200 × 10(6), and sperm morphology <20% normal forms. With a multivariable regression model based on the redefined male semen subfertility criteria we were able to make a finer differentiation between subfertile men, with probabilities of fathering a child ranging from 7% to 41%. CONCLUSION(S): The current WHO criteria for semen quality do not discriminate between fertile and subfertile men. Our redefined and graded semen criteria have strong predictive value. If interpreted correctly, the fast and inexpensive semen analysis remains the gold standard for defining a man's role in subfertility.

Reproducibility and reliability of repeated semen analyses in male partners of subfertile couples.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the precise degree of variability that is represented by the reproducibility and reliability of semen analysis. The general assumption is that semen analyses need to be repeated because of a high degree of within-individual variability. However, the precise degree of variability is not well established in male partners of subfertile couples. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Two university hospitals in the Netherlands, which routinely perform two semen analyses in the male partner of subfertile couples. PATIENT(S): Male partners of subfertile couples. INTERVENTIONS: None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): We assessed the test-retest reproducibility, by calculating the coefficient of variation (CV(w)) for five semen parameters. The CV(w) expresses, on a relative scale, the degree of closeness of repeated measurements taken in the same subject. We also estimated the reliability of these semen parameters, in terms of the intraclass correlation coefficient, which expresses the ratio of the between-subject variability over the total variability. RESULT(S): We analyzed the data of 5,240 men and found that the CV(w) of all semen parameters ranged from 28% to 34%. The intraclass correlation coefficients of these semen parameters were moderate to high: volume: 0.70; concentration: 0.89; motility: 0.58; morphology: 0.60; total motile count: 0.73. CONCLUSION(S): This study affirmed the presumed large within-subject variability and the limited reproducibility of semen analyses in subfertile men. Whether this degree of variability within men justifies one or more repetitions of the semen analysis in view of consequences for clinical management should be the topic of future studies. Until then it seems reasonable to perform two semen analyses.

Time to pregnancy after a previous miscarriage in subfertile couples.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the time to spontaneous ongoing pregnancy after a previous miscarriage in subfertile couples. DESIGN: A prospective cohort study. SETTING: The study was conducted in 38 fertility centers in the Netherlands. PATIENT(S): Subfertile couples who miscarried after completing their basic fertility work-up. INTERVENTION(S): Expectant management after a miscarriage. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Spontaneous ongoing pregnancy. RESULT(S): We included 5,663 subfertile couples, of which 1,098 (19%) conceived spontaneously. Among these 1,098 couples, 199 (18%) miscarried and these couples were included in the present study. Follow-up was completed for 171 couples, of which 95 conceived again within 24 months of follow-up. Of these 95 pregnancies, 86 (91%) were ongoing. The cumulative spontaneous ongoing pregnancy rate (PR) after 24 months was 70% (95% confidence interval [CI] 59%-81%). CONCLUSION(S): Subfertile couples, who experience a treatment-independent pregnancy resulting in a miscarriage, have very good prospects of a spontaneous ongoing pregnancy in the near future. This information is useful in counseling couples who had a miscarriage after a previous period of subfertility.