Hysteroscopy for treating subfertility associated with suspected major uterine cavity abnormalities

Background : Observational studies suggest higher pregnancy rates after the hysteroscopic removal of endometrial polyps, submucous fibroids, uterine septum or intrauterine adhesions, which are detectable in 10% to 15% of women seeking treatment for subfertility. Objectives : To assess the effects of the hysteroscopic removal of endometrial polyps, submucous fibroids, uterine septum or intrauterine adhesions suspected on ultrasound, hysterosalpingography, diagnostic hysteroscopy or any combination of thesemethods inwomenwith otherwise unexplained subfertility or prior to intrauterine insemination (IUI), in vitro fertilisation (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). Search methods : We searched theCochraneMenstrualDisorders and Subfertility SpecialisedRegister (8 September 2014), theCochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (The Cochrane Library 2014, Issue 9), MEDLINE (1950 to 12 October 2014), EMBASE (inception to 12 October 2014), CINAHL (inception to 11 October 2014) and other electronic sources of trials including trial registers, sources of unpublished literature and reference lists. We handsearched the American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM) conference abstracts and proceedings (from January 2013 to October 2014) and we contacted experts in the field. Selection criteria : Randomised comparisons between operative hysteroscopy versus control in women with otherwise unexplained subfertility or undergoing IUI, IVF or ICSI and suspected major uterine cavity abnormalities diagnosed by ultrasonography, saline infusion/ gel instillation sonography, hysterosalpingography, diagnostic hysteroscopy or any combination of these methods. Primary outcomes were live birth and hysteroscopy complications. Secondary outcomes were pregnancy and miscarriage. Data collection and analysis : Two review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion and risk of bias, and extracted data. We contacted study authors for additional information. Main results : We retrieved 12 randomised trials possibly addressing the research questions. Only two studies (309 women) met the inclusion criteria. Neither reported the primary outcomes of live birth or procedure related complications. In women with otherwise unexplained subfertility and submucous fibroids there was no conclusive evidence of a difference between the intervention group treated with hysteroscopic myomectomy and the control group having regular fertility-oriented intercourse during 12 months for the outcome of clinical pregnancy. A large clinical benefit with hysteroscopic myomectomy cannot be excluded: if 21% of women with fibroids achieve a clinical pregnancy having timed intercourse only, the evidence suggests that 39% of women (95% CI 21% to 58%) will achieve a successful outcome following the hysteroscopic removal of the fibroids (odds ratio (OR) 2.44, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.97 to 6.17, P = 0.06, 94 women, very low quality evidence). There is no evidence of a difference between the comparison groups for the outcome of miscarriage (OR 0.58, 95% CI 0.12 to 2.85, P = 0.50, 30 clinical pregnancies in 94 women, very low quality evidence). The hysteroscopic removal of polyps prior to IUI can increase the chance of a clinical pregnancy compared to simple diagnostic hysteroscopy and polyp biopsy: if 28% of women achieve a clinical pregnancy with a simple diagnostic hysteroscopy, the evidence suggests that 63% of women (95% CI 50% to 76%) will achieve a clinical pregnancy after the hysteroscopic removal of the endometrial polyps (OR 4.41, 95% CI 2.45 to 7.96, P < 0.00001, 204 women, moderate quality evidence). Authors' conclusions : A large benefit with the hysteroscopic removal of submucous fibroids for improving the chance of clinical pregnancy in women with otherwise unexplained subfertility cannot be excluded. The hysteroscopic removal of endometrial polyps suspected on ultrasound in women prior to IUI may increase the clinical pregnancy rate. More randomised studies are needed to substantiate the effectiveness of the hysteroscopic removal of suspected endometrial polyps, submucous fibroids, uterine septum or intrauterine adhesions in women with unexplained subfertility or prior to IUI, IVF or ICSI

Have we overlooked the role of mifepristone for the medical management of tubal ectopic pregnancy?

open access via the OUP Agreement Funding B.W.M. is supported by a NHMRC Practitioner Fellowship (GNT1176437).Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Reply : 'One-stop shop' ultrasound evaluation of an infertile patient: doing less is no longer an option

Funding Information: The FOAM study was an investigator-initiated study funded by ZonMw, the Netherlands organization for Health Research and Development (project number 837001504). ZonMw funded the whole project. IQ Medical Ventures provided the ExEm-foamVR kits free of charge. The funders had no role in study design, collection, analysis and interpretation of the data. The corresponding author had full access to all the data in the study and had final responsibility for the decision to submit for publication.Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Treating suspected uterine cavity abnormalities by hysteroscopy to improve reproductive outcome in women with unexplained infertility or prior to IUI, IVF, or ICSI

Endometrial polyps, submucous fibroids, uterine septa, and intrauterine adhesions can be found by ultrasound (US), HSG, hysteroscopy, or any combined in 10–15 % of infertile women. Observational studies suggest a better reproductive outcome when these anomalies are removed by operative hysteroscopy. The current Cochrane review assesses the effectiveness of hysteroscopy for treating these suspected anomalies in women with otherwise unexplained infertility or prior to intrauterine insemination, in vitro fertilization, or intracytoplasmic sperm injection

Review of the safety, efficacy, costs and patient acceptability of recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone for injection in assisting ovulation induction in infertile women

Anovulation is a common cause of female subfertility. Treatment of anovulation is aimed at induction of ovulation. In women with clomiphene-citrate resistant WHO group II anovulation, one of the treatment options is ovulation induction with exogenous follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH or follitropin). FSH is derived from urine or is produced as recombinant FSH. Two forms of recombinant FSH are available – follitropin alpha and follitropin beta. To evaluate the efficacy, safety, costs and acceptability of recombinant FSH, we performed a review to compare recombinant FSH with urinary-derived FSH products. Follitropin alpha, beta and urinary FSH products appeared to be equally effective in terms of pregnancy rates. Patient safety was also found to be comparable, as the incidence of side effects including multiple pregnancies was similar for all FSH products. In practice follitropin alpha and beta may be more convenient to use due to the ease of self-administration, but they are also more expensive than the urinary products

Prioritizing IVF treatment in the post-COVID 19 era : a predictive modelling study based on UK national data

Acknowledgements We thank the Human Fertilization and Embryological Authority for permission to analyse their database, extracting the requested information and assisting with our queries in an efficient manner. We also acknowledge the data management support of the Grampian Data Safe Haven (DaSH) and the associated financial support of NHS Research Scotland, through NHS Grampian investment in the Grampian DaSH (www.abdn.ac.uk/iahs/facilities/grampian-data-safe-haven.php). Funding: No external funding was received for this study. We plan to disseminate the results to patient organisations and the Human Fertilisation and Embryology AuthorityPeer reviewedPostprin

Stillbirth and neonatal mortality in a subsequent pregnancy following stillbirth:a population-based cohort study

BACKGROUND: A history of stillbirth is a risk factor for recurrent fetal death in a subsequent pregnancy. Reported risks of recurrent fetal death are often not stratified by gestational age. In subsequent pregnancies increased rates of medical interventions are reported without evidence of perinatal benefit. The aim of this study was to estimate gestational-age specific risks of recurrent stillbirth and to evaluate the effect of obstetrical management on perinatal outcome after previous stillbirth. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study in the Netherlands was designed that included 252.827 women with two consecutive singleton pregnancies (1(st) and 2(nd) delivery) between 1999 and 2007. Data was obtained from the national Perinatal Registry and analyzed for pregnancy outcomes. Fetal deaths associated with a congenital anomaly were excluded. The primary outcome was the occurrence of stillbirth in the second pregnancy stratified by gestational age. Secondary outcome was the influence of obstetrical management on perinatal outcome in a subsequent pregnancy. RESULTS: Of 252.827 first pregnancies, 2.058 pregnancies ended in a stillbirth (8.1 per 1000). After adjusting for confounding factors, women with a prior stillbirth have a two-fold higher risk of recurrence (aOR 1.96, 95% CI 1.07–3.60) compared to women with a live birth in their first pregnancy. The highest risk of recurrence occurred in the group of women with a stillbirth in early gestation between 22 and 28 weeks of gestation (a OR 2.25, 95% CI 0.62–8.15), while after 32 weeks the risk decreased. The risk of neonatal death after 34 weeks of gestation is higher in women with a history of stillbirth (aOR 6.48, 95% CI 2.61–16.1) and the risk of neonatal death increases with expectant obstetric management (aOR 10.0, 95% CI 2.43–41.1). CONCLUSIONS: A history of stillbirth remains an important risk for recurrent stillbirth especially in early gestation (22–28 weeks). Women with a previous stillbirth should be counselled for elective induction in the subsequent pregnancy at 37–38 weeks of gestation to decrease the risk of perinatal death

CIVIL JURISDICTION, INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY AND THE INTERNET

At the core of the civil litigation system is the notion of jurisdiction. In a narrow sense it refers to whether a court has the authority to hear a case in relation to specific people and activities (subject matter) but in a broader sense it also encompasses what law should be applied (choice of law), whether the court is a suitable court to hear the case (choice of court) and the enforcement of judgements. The notion of jurisdiction provides a tool for efficiently managing litigation and traditionally has been based upon notions of connection to a particular territory. In the global transnational world of the Internet the concept of jurisdiction has struggled to find a sensible meaning.1 Does jurisdiction lie everywhere that the Internet runs or is it more narrowly defined? In this chapter we examine recent cases concerning jurisdiction and the Internet before the courts of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) in matters relating to intellectual property. We also consider decisions in Australia and the United States of America (US) and international developments in the area