medigraphic.com
SPANISH

Revista Mexicana de Medicina de la Reproducción

  • Contents
  • View Archive
  • Information
    • General Information        
    • Directory
  • Publish
    • Instructions for authors        
  • medigraphic.com
    • Home
    • Journals index            
    • Register / Login
  • Mi perfil

2018, Number 1

<< Back Next >>

Rev Mex Med Repro 2018; 8.9 (1)

Results and characterization of infertile couples submitted to controlled ovarian stimulation and intrauterine insemination

Medarano-Uribe FA, Vielma-Valdez A
Full text How to cite this article

Language: Spanish
References: 8
Page: 17-26
PDF size: 309.06 Kb.


Key words:

secondary infertility, intrauterine insemination, controlled ovarian stimulation.

ABSTRACT

Background: The optimum results after intrauterine inseminations depend on several factors. Nowadays, we don’t know the results and characteristics of infertile couples submitted to controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) and intrauterine insemination (IUI) at National Institute of Medical Science and Nutrition Salvador Zubirán (INCMNSZ), located at Mexico City.
Objective: To know the results and characteristics of infertile couples submitted to ovarian stimulation and intrauterine insemination at INCMNSZ.
Material and Method: A cross-sectional study developed in infertile couples from January 1st, 2014 to May 31, 2015. We included couples with primary or secondary infertility and complete study protocol by factors (endocrine, infectious, salpinx obstructions and male mild infertility), even the time of infertility evolution, body mass index or antecedent of any other disease.
Results: We analyzed 29 couples, of them only 9 couples (31%) got pregnant after ovarian stimulation and intrauterine insemination. We made 49 cycles of COS with homologous semen samples. The pregnancy rate reported was 18% per cycle. The proportion of women pregnant diagnosed by secondary infertility was significantly greater than those who did not get pregnant (p = 0.014). The semen preparation technique most frequently used in pregnant couples was basic washing (61.5%).
Conclusions: The most relevant prognostic factor in pregnant couples was the secondary infertility antecedent.


REFERENCES

  1. National Collaborating Centre for Women's and Children's Health (UK). Fertility: assessment and treatment for people with fertility problems. NICE: Guidance 2013.

  2. Boomsma CM, Heineman MJ, Cohlen BJ, et al. Semen preparation techniques for intrauterine insemination. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007;(4):CD004507.

  3. Annual report of the French Biomedicine Agency 2005. www.agence-biomedicine.fr

  4. Merviel P, Heraud MH, Grenier N, et al. Predictive factors for pregnancy after intrauterine insemination (IUI): an analysis of 1038 cycles and a review of the literature. Fertil Steril 2010;93(1):79-88.

  5. De Mouzon J, Goossens V, Bhattacharya S, et al. Assisted reproductive technology in Europe, 2006: results generated from European registers by ESHRE. Hum Reprod 2010;25(8):1851-62.

  6. Valdez JA, Marín O, Hinojosa JC y col. Tasa de embarazos en pacientes sometidas a inseminación intrauterina en una unidad médica de alta especialidad. Revista Mexicana de Medicina de la Reproducción 2009;1(4):135-8.

  7. Barros Delgadillo JC, Rojas Ruiz JC, Molina Munguía AC, et al. Prognostic factors of pregnancy in intrauterine insemination. Ginecol Obstet Mex 2006;74(12):611-25.

  8. Cantineau AE, Cohlen BJ, Heineman MJ. Ovarian stimulation protocols (anti-oestrogens, gonadotrophins with and without GnRH agonist/antagonists) for intrauterine insemination (IUI) in women with subfertility. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;(2):CD005356.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com

Mi perfil

C?MO CITAR (Vancouver)

Rev Mex Med Repro. 2018;8.9