Comparative efficacy of intrauterine infusion treatments for recurrent implantation failure: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

IF 3.2 3区 医学 Q2 GENETICS & HEREDITY
Lingjie Jiang, Liang Wen, Xiaojuan Lv, Nan Tang, Yuan Yuan
{"title":"Comparative efficacy of intrauterine infusion treatments for recurrent implantation failure: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.","authors":"Lingjie Jiang, Liang Wen, Xiaojuan Lv, Nan Tang, Yuan Yuan","doi":"10.1007/s10815-025-03436-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>Recurrent implantation failure (RIF) is a significant challenge in assisted reproductive technology (ART), affecting many women undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF). This study aims to compare the efficacy of various intrauterine infusion treatments, including granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF), platelet-rich plasma (PRP), human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG), and peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs), in improving clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), live birth rate (LBR), and miscarriage rate (MR) in women with RIF.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A comprehensive search was conducted in multiple databases, including Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and China National Knowledge Internet (CNKI), to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy of intrauterine infusion treatments for RIF. Data extraction and quality assessment were performed independently by two reviewers. Network meta-analysis was conducted using a random-effects model to compare the outcomes of different treatments.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 25 RCTs involving 3035 patients were included in the network meta-analysis. The treatments involved G-CSF, PRP, HCG, PBMCs, placebo, and blank control. The results of the network meta-analysis for CPR and LBR were statistically significant among treatments, but there was no statistical significance in MR. The surface under cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) ranking of CPR and LBR showed that intrauterine infusion treatments of G-CSF, PRP, HCG, and PBMCs were much better than placebo and blank. The SUCRA values of CPR were ranked probabilistically from high to low as follows: PRP (84.5%) > PBMCs (76.5%) > G-CSF (65.7%) > HCG (52.5%) > placebo (20.8%) > blank (0.1%). The SUCRA values of LBR were ranked probabilistically from high to low as follows: PRP (81.4%) > PBMCs (64.6%) > G-CSF (58.0%) > HCG (48.7%) > placebo (42.4%) > blank (4.9%).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>All these findings confirmed that intrauterine infusions of PRP and PBMCs significantly improve pregnancy outcomes in women with RIF. PRP emerged as the most effective treatment. However, to establish the most effective approach for managing patients with RIF, future research should prioritize direct and robust comparisons between PRP and other therapeutic strategies, ensuring a comprehensive evaluation of their relative efficacy.</p>","PeriodicalId":15246,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-025-03436-2","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: Recurrent implantation failure (RIF) is a significant challenge in assisted reproductive technology (ART), affecting many women undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF). This study aims to compare the efficacy of various intrauterine infusion treatments, including granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF), platelet-rich plasma (PRP), human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG), and peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs), in improving clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), live birth rate (LBR), and miscarriage rate (MR) in women with RIF.

Methods: A comprehensive search was conducted in multiple databases, including Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and China National Knowledge Internet (CNKI), to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the efficacy of intrauterine infusion treatments for RIF. Data extraction and quality assessment were performed independently by two reviewers. Network meta-analysis was conducted using a random-effects model to compare the outcomes of different treatments.

Results: A total of 25 RCTs involving 3035 patients were included in the network meta-analysis. The treatments involved G-CSF, PRP, HCG, PBMCs, placebo, and blank control. The results of the network meta-analysis for CPR and LBR were statistically significant among treatments, but there was no statistical significance in MR. The surface under cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA) ranking of CPR and LBR showed that intrauterine infusion treatments of G-CSF, PRP, HCG, and PBMCs were much better than placebo and blank. The SUCRA values of CPR were ranked probabilistically from high to low as follows: PRP (84.5%) > PBMCs (76.5%) > G-CSF (65.7%) > HCG (52.5%) > placebo (20.8%) > blank (0.1%). The SUCRA values of LBR were ranked probabilistically from high to low as follows: PRP (81.4%) > PBMCs (64.6%) > G-CSF (58.0%) > HCG (48.7%) > placebo (42.4%) > blank (4.9%).

Conclusion: All these findings confirmed that intrauterine infusions of PRP and PBMCs significantly improve pregnancy outcomes in women with RIF. PRP emerged as the most effective treatment. However, to establish the most effective approach for managing patients with RIF, future research should prioritize direct and robust comparisons between PRP and other therapeutic strategies, ensuring a comprehensive evaluation of their relative efficacy.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
9.70%
发文量
286
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics publishes cellular, molecular, genetic, and epigenetic discoveries advancing our understanding of the biology and underlying mechanisms from gametogenesis to offspring health. Special emphasis is placed on the practice and evolution of assisted reproduction technologies (ARTs) with reference to the diagnosis and management of diseases affecting fertility. Our goal is to educate our readership in the translation of basic and clinical discoveries made from human or relevant animal models to the safe and efficacious practice of human ARTs. The scientific rigor and ethical standards embraced by the JARG editorial team ensures a broad international base of expertise guiding the marriage of contemporary clinical research paradigms with basic science discovery. JARG publishes original papers, minireviews, case reports, and opinion pieces often combined into special topic issues that will educate clinicians and scientists with interests in the mechanisms of human development that bear on the treatment of infertility and emerging innovations in human ARTs. The guiding principles of male and female reproductive health impacting pre- and post-conceptional viability and developmental potential are emphasized within the purview of human reproductive health in current and future generations of our species. The journal is published in cooperation with the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, an organization of more than 8,000 physicians, researchers, nurses, technicians and other professionals dedicated to advancing knowledge and expertise in reproductive biology.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信