The effects of diagnostic hysteroscopy on the reproductive outcomes of infertile women without intrauterine pathologies: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Purpose: Hysteroscopy can be used both to diagnose and to treat intrauterine pathologies. It is well known that hysteroscopy helps to improve reproductive outcomes by treating intrauterine pathologies. However, it is uncertain whether hysteroscopy is helpful in the absence of intrauterine pathologie...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Publicado en:Korean Journal of Women Health Nursing Vol. 26; no. 4; pp. 300 - 318
Autores principales: Soo Yeon Yang, Seung-Joo Chon, Seon Heui Lee
Formato: meta analysis research systematic review tables/charts Journal Article
Publicado: Korean Academy of Women's Health Nursing Dec2020
Acceso en línea:Ver este registro en EBSCOhost
Descripción
Sumario:Purpose: Hysteroscopy can be used both to diagnose and to treat intrauterine pathologies. It is well known that hysteroscopy helps to improve reproductive outcomes by treating intrauterine pathologies. However, it is uncertain whether hysteroscopy is helpful in the absence of intrauterine pathologies. This study aimed to confirm whether hysteroscopy improves the reproductive outcomes of infertile women without intrauterine pathologies. Methods: We conducted a systematic review of 11 studies retrieved from Ovid-MEDLINE, Ovid-Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Two independent investigators extracted the data and used risk-of-bias tools (RoB 2.0 and ROBINS-I) to assess their quality. Results: Diagnostic hysteroscopy prior to in vitro fertilization (IVF)/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) was associated with a higher clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) and live birth rate (LBR) than non-hysteroscopy in patients with recurrent implantation failure (RIF) (odds ratio, 1.79 and 1.46; 95% confidence interval, 1.40-2.30 and 1.08-1.97 for CPR and LBR, respectively) while hysteroscopy prior to first IVF was ineffective. The overall meta-analysis of LBR showed statistically significant findings for RIF, but a subgroup analysis showed effects only in prospective cohorts (odds ratio, 1.40 and 1.47; 95% confidence interval, 0.62-3.16 and 1.04-2.07 for randomized controlled trials and prospective cohorts, respectively). Therefore, the LBR should be interpreted carefully and further research is needed. Conclusion: Although further research is warranted, hysteroscopy may be considered as a diagnostic and treatment option for infertile women who have experienced RIF regardless of intrauterine pathologies. This finding enables nurses to educate and support infertile women with RIF prior to IVF/ICSI.