Rosa B Gutarra-Vilchez, Juan C Vazquez, Demián Glujovsky, Frank Lizaraso, Andres Viteri-García, Maria José Martinez-Zapata
{"title":"接受生育治疗的妇女用血管扩张剂。","authors":"Rosa B Gutarra-Vilchez, Juan C Vazquez, Demián Glujovsky, Frank Lizaraso, Andres Viteri-García, Maria José Martinez-Zapata","doi":"10.1002/14651858.CD010001.pub4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The rate of successful pregnancies brought to term has barely increased since the first assisted reproductive technology (ART) technique became available. Research suggests that vasodilators may increase endometrial receptivity, thicken the endometrium, and favour uterine relaxation, all of which could improve the chances of successful assisted pregnancy.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of vasodilators in women undergoing fertility treatment.</p><p><strong>Search methods: </strong>We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register of controlled trials, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases, and two clinical trial registries in April 2024, with no language or date restrictions. We also searched grey literature sources and checked the reference lists of relevant articles.</p><p><strong>Selection criteria: </strong>We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing vasodilators (alone or combined with other treatments) versus placebo or no treatment or versus other agents in women undergoing fertility treatment.</p><p><strong>Data collection and analysis: </strong>Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed risk of bias, extracted data, and calculated risk ratios (RRs). We combined study data using a fixed-effect model and assessed evidence certainty using the GRADE approach. Our primary outcomes were live birth or ongoing pregnancy and vasodilator side effects. Our secondary outcomes were clinical pregnancy, endometrial thickness, multiple gestation, miscarriage, and ectopic pregnancy.</p><p><strong>Main results: </strong>We included 45 studies with a total of 4404 women. The included studies compared a vasodilator versus a placebo or no treatment (40 RCTs), vasodilators plus another agent versus placebo or no treatment (3 RCTs) or versus oestrogens (3 RCTs). The mean length of follow-up was 15.45 weeks. Overall, the certainty of evidence was very low to moderate. The main limitations were imprecision (low number of events and participants) and risk of bias (lack of blinding in studies that reported subjective outcomes). Vasodilators versus placebo or no treatment Vasodilators may result in little to no difference in rates of live birth or ongoing pregnancy compared with placebo or no treatment (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.58; I² = 0%; 6 RCTs, 740 women; low-certainty evidence), but probably increase overall rates of side effects (RR 2.14, 95% CI 1.55 to 2.98; I² = 0%; 7 RCTs, 668 women; moderate-certainty evidence). The evidence suggests that 246 per 1000 women achieve live birth or ongoing pregnancy with a placebo or no treatment, and 229 to 389 per 1000 will do so using vasodilators. Vasodilators compared with placebo or no treatment likely increase rates of clinical pregnancy (RR 1.45, 95% CI 1.28 to 1.64; I² = 22%; 25 RCTs, 2506 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Vasodilators compared with placebo or no treatment probably have little or no effect on rates of multiple gestation or birth (RR 1.37, 95% CI 0.73 to 2.55; I² = 0%; 7 RCTs, 763 women; moderate-certainty evidence), miscarriage (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.74; I² = 0%; 8 RCTs; 829 women; moderate-certainty evidence), and ectopic pregnancy (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.34 to 4.59; I² = 0%; 4 RCTs, 543 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Most studies found a beneficial effect of vasodilators for endometrial thickness, but the reported effect estimates varied (I² = 93%), from a mean difference of 0.47 mm higher (95% CI 0.90 mm lower to 1. 84 mm higher) to 1.94 mm higher (95% CI 1.37 higher to 2.51 mm higher), and the evidence was very uncertain. Hence, we are unsure how to interpret these results. Vasodilators versus oestrogens Vasodilators compared with oestrogens may have little or no effect on rates of live birth or ongoing pregnancy (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.33; 1 RCT, 44 women, low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain regarding the effect of sildenafil compared with oestrogens on clinical pregnancy rates (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.38; I² = 59%; 3 RCTs, 262 women; very low-certainty evidence), endometrial thickness (RR 1.90, 95 CI 1.15 to 3.13; 1 RCT, 120 women; very low-certainty evidence) and miscarriage rates (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.12; 1 RCT, 44 women; very low-certainty evidence) AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Among women undergoing fertility treatment, there may be little or no difference in the rate of live birth or ongoing pregnancy in those who receive vasodilators compared with those who receive a placebo or no treatment, and compared with those who receive oestrogens. Compared with placebo or no treatment, vasodilators likely increase rates of clinical pregnancy, but probably also increase overall rates of side effects. The evidence on clinical pregnancy with vasodilators versus oestrogens is very uncertain, and we found no evidence on overall side effects for the comparison of vasodilators versus oestrogens. We are unsure about the effect of vasodilators versus placebo or no treatment and versus oestrogens on endometrial thickness. Vasodilators versus placebo or no treatment probably have little or no effect on multiple gestation or birth, miscarriage, and ectopic pregnancy. Future studies should be adequately randomised and powered to ensure a more accurate evaluation of each treatment, with live births as a primary outcome.</p>","PeriodicalId":10473,"journal":{"name":"Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews","volume":"3 ","pages":"CD010001"},"PeriodicalIF":8.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11883854/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Vasodilators for women undergoing fertility treatment.\",\"authors\":\"Rosa B Gutarra-Vilchez, Juan C Vazquez, Demián Glujovsky, Frank Lizaraso, Andres Viteri-García, Maria José Martinez-Zapata\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/14651858.CD010001.pub4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The rate of successful pregnancies brought to term has barely increased since the first assisted reproductive technology (ART) technique became available. Research suggests that vasodilators may increase endometrial receptivity, thicken the endometrium, and favour uterine relaxation, all of which could improve the chances of successful assisted pregnancy.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of vasodilators in women undergoing fertility treatment.</p><p><strong>Search methods: </strong>We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register of controlled trials, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases, and two clinical trial registries in April 2024, with no language or date restrictions. We also searched grey literature sources and checked the reference lists of relevant articles.</p><p><strong>Selection criteria: </strong>We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing vasodilators (alone or combined with other treatments) versus placebo or no treatment or versus other agents in women undergoing fertility treatment.</p><p><strong>Data collection and analysis: </strong>Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed risk of bias, extracted data, and calculated risk ratios (RRs). We combined study data using a fixed-effect model and assessed evidence certainty using the GRADE approach. Our primary outcomes were live birth or ongoing pregnancy and vasodilator side effects. Our secondary outcomes were clinical pregnancy, endometrial thickness, multiple gestation, miscarriage, and ectopic pregnancy.</p><p><strong>Main results: </strong>We included 45 studies with a total of 4404 women. The included studies compared a vasodilator versus a placebo or no treatment (40 RCTs), vasodilators plus another agent versus placebo or no treatment (3 RCTs) or versus oestrogens (3 RCTs). The mean length of follow-up was 15.45 weeks. Overall, the certainty of evidence was very low to moderate. The main limitations were imprecision (low number of events and participants) and risk of bias (lack of blinding in studies that reported subjective outcomes). Vasodilators versus placebo or no treatment Vasodilators may result in little to no difference in rates of live birth or ongoing pregnancy compared with placebo or no treatment (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.58; I² = 0%; 6 RCTs, 740 women; low-certainty evidence), but probably increase overall rates of side effects (RR 2.14, 95% CI 1.55 to 2.98; I² = 0%; 7 RCTs, 668 women; moderate-certainty evidence). The evidence suggests that 246 per 1000 women achieve live birth or ongoing pregnancy with a placebo or no treatment, and 229 to 389 per 1000 will do so using vasodilators. Vasodilators compared with placebo or no treatment likely increase rates of clinical pregnancy (RR 1.45, 95% CI 1.28 to 1.64; I² = 22%; 25 RCTs, 2506 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Vasodilators compared with placebo or no treatment probably have little or no effect on rates of multiple gestation or birth (RR 1.37, 95% CI 0.73 to 2.55; I² = 0%; 7 RCTs, 763 women; moderate-certainty evidence), miscarriage (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.74; I² = 0%; 8 RCTs; 829 women; moderate-certainty evidence), and ectopic pregnancy (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.34 to 4.59; I² = 0%; 4 RCTs, 543 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Most studies found a beneficial effect of vasodilators for endometrial thickness, but the reported effect estimates varied (I² = 93%), from a mean difference of 0.47 mm higher (95% CI 0.90 mm lower to 1. 84 mm higher) to 1.94 mm higher (95% CI 1.37 higher to 2.51 mm higher), and the evidence was very uncertain. Hence, we are unsure how to interpret these results. Vasodilators versus oestrogens Vasodilators compared with oestrogens may have little or no effect on rates of live birth or ongoing pregnancy (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.33; 1 RCT, 44 women, low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain regarding the effect of sildenafil compared with oestrogens on clinical pregnancy rates (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.38; I² = 59%; 3 RCTs, 262 women; very low-certainty evidence), endometrial thickness (RR 1.90, 95 CI 1.15 to 3.13; 1 RCT, 120 women; very low-certainty evidence) and miscarriage rates (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.12; 1 RCT, 44 women; very low-certainty evidence) AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Among women undergoing fertility treatment, there may be little or no difference in the rate of live birth or ongoing pregnancy in those who receive vasodilators compared with those who receive a placebo or no treatment, and compared with those who receive oestrogens. Compared with placebo or no treatment, vasodilators likely increase rates of clinical pregnancy, but probably also increase overall rates of side effects. The evidence on clinical pregnancy with vasodilators versus oestrogens is very uncertain, and we found no evidence on overall side effects for the comparison of vasodilators versus oestrogens. We are unsure about the effect of vasodilators versus placebo or no treatment and versus oestrogens on endometrial thickness. Vasodilators versus placebo or no treatment probably have little or no effect on multiple gestation or birth, miscarriage, and ectopic pregnancy. Future studies should be adequately randomised and powered to ensure a more accurate evaluation of each treatment, with live births as a primary outcome.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":10473,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews\",\"volume\":\"3 \",\"pages\":\"CD010001\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11883854/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD010001.pub4\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD010001.pub4","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:自从第一次辅助生殖技术(ART)技术可用以来,成功妊娠足月率几乎没有增加。研究表明,血管扩张剂可能会增加子宫内膜容受性,使子宫内膜增厚,有利于子宫松弛,所有这些都可以提高辅助妊娠成功的机会。目的:评价血管扩张剂在妇女生育治疗中的有效性和安全性。检索方法:我们于2024年4月检索了Cochrane妇科与生育组对照试验专业注册库、CENTRAL、MEDLINE、Embase、其他三个数据库和两个临床试验注册库,无语言或日期限制。我们还检索了灰色文献来源,检查了相关文章的参考文献列表。选择标准:我们纳入了在接受生育治疗的妇女中比较血管扩张剂(单独或联合其他治疗)与安慰剂或不治疗或与其他药物的随机对照试验(rct)。数据收集和分析:两位综述作者独立选择研究,评估偏倚风险,提取数据,计算风险比(rr)。我们使用固定效应模型合并研究数据,并使用GRADE方法评估证据确定性。我们的主要结局是活产或妊娠和血管扩张剂副作用。我们的次要结局是临床妊娠、子宫内膜厚度、多胎妊娠、流产和异位妊娠。主要结果:我们纳入了45项研究,共4404名女性。纳入的研究比较了血管扩张剂与安慰剂或不治疗(40项随机对照试验),血管扩张剂加另一种药物与安慰剂或不治疗(3项随机对照试验)或与雌激素(3项随机对照试验)。平均随访时间15.45周。总体而言,证据的确定性非常低至中等。主要的限制是不精确(事件和参与者数量少)和偏倚风险(报告主观结果的研究缺乏盲法)。与安慰剂或未治疗相比,血管扩张剂可能导致活产率或持续妊娠率几乎没有差异(RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.93至1.58;I²= 0%;6项随机对照试验,740名女性;低确定性证据),但可能增加总体副作用发生率(RR 2.14, 95% CI 1.55 - 2.98;I²= 0%;7项随机对照试验,668名女性;moderate-certainty证据)。有证据表明,每1000名妇女中有246名在服用安慰剂或不接受治疗的情况下活产或继续妊娠,每1000名妇女中有229至389名使用血管扩张剂。与安慰剂或未治疗相比,血管扩张剂可能增加临床妊娠率(RR 1.45, 95% CI 1.28至1.64;I²= 22%;25项随机对照试验,2506名女性;moderate-certainty证据)。与安慰剂或未治疗相比,血管扩张剂对多胎妊娠或分娩的影响可能很小或没有影响(RR 1.37, 95% CI 0.73至2.55;I²= 0%;7项随机对照试验,763名女性;中等确定性证据)、流产(RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.59 ~ 1.74;I²= 0%;8相关;829名女性;中等确定性证据)和异位妊娠(RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.34 ~ 4.59;I²= 0%;4项随机对照试验,543名女性;moderate-certainty证据)。大多数研究发现血管扩张剂对子宫内膜厚度有有益的影响,但报道的效果估计各不相同(I²= 93%),平均差异从0.47 mm高(95% CI 0.90 mm低)到1。84毫米高)至1.94毫米高(95% CI 1.37至2.51毫米高),证据非常不确定。因此,我们不确定如何解释这些结果。血管扩张剂与雌激素相比,血管扩张剂对活产率或持续妊娠率的影响可能很小或没有影响(RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.30至1.33;1项随机对照试验,44名女性,低确定性证据)。关于西地那非与雌激素相比对临床妊娠率的影响,证据非常不确定(RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.71 ~ 1.38;I²= 59%;3项随机对照试验,262名女性;非常低确定性证据),子宫内膜厚度(RR 1.90, 95 CI 1.15至3.13;1项随机对照试验,120名女性;极低确定性证据)和流产率(RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.05 ~ 5.12;1项随机对照试验,44名女性;作者的结论:在接受生育治疗的妇女中,接受血管扩张剂治疗的妇女与接受安慰剂或不接受治疗的妇女相比,与接受雌激素治疗的妇女相比,活产率或持续妊娠率可能很少或没有差异。与安慰剂或不治疗相比,血管扩张剂可能增加临床妊娠率,但也可能增加总体副作用率。血管扩张剂与雌激素的临床妊娠的证据非常不确定,我们没有发现血管扩张剂与雌激素比较的总体副作用的证据。我们不确定血管扩张剂与安慰剂或不治疗以及雌激素对子宫内膜厚度的影响。 血管扩张剂与安慰剂或不治疗相比,对多胎妊娠或分娩、流产和异位妊娠的影响可能很小或没有影响。未来的研究应该充分随机化,并以活产为主要结果,确保对每种治疗方法进行更准确的评估。
Vasodilators for women undergoing fertility treatment.
Background: The rate of successful pregnancies brought to term has barely increased since the first assisted reproductive technology (ART) technique became available. Research suggests that vasodilators may increase endometrial receptivity, thicken the endometrium, and favour uterine relaxation, all of which could improve the chances of successful assisted pregnancy.
Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of vasodilators in women undergoing fertility treatment.
Search methods: We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register of controlled trials, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases, and two clinical trial registries in April 2024, with no language or date restrictions. We also searched grey literature sources and checked the reference lists of relevant articles.
Selection criteria: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing vasodilators (alone or combined with other treatments) versus placebo or no treatment or versus other agents in women undergoing fertility treatment.
Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed risk of bias, extracted data, and calculated risk ratios (RRs). We combined study data using a fixed-effect model and assessed evidence certainty using the GRADE approach. Our primary outcomes were live birth or ongoing pregnancy and vasodilator side effects. Our secondary outcomes were clinical pregnancy, endometrial thickness, multiple gestation, miscarriage, and ectopic pregnancy.
Main results: We included 45 studies with a total of 4404 women. The included studies compared a vasodilator versus a placebo or no treatment (40 RCTs), vasodilators plus another agent versus placebo or no treatment (3 RCTs) or versus oestrogens (3 RCTs). The mean length of follow-up was 15.45 weeks. Overall, the certainty of evidence was very low to moderate. The main limitations were imprecision (low number of events and participants) and risk of bias (lack of blinding in studies that reported subjective outcomes). Vasodilators versus placebo or no treatment Vasodilators may result in little to no difference in rates of live birth or ongoing pregnancy compared with placebo or no treatment (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.58; I² = 0%; 6 RCTs, 740 women; low-certainty evidence), but probably increase overall rates of side effects (RR 2.14, 95% CI 1.55 to 2.98; I² = 0%; 7 RCTs, 668 women; moderate-certainty evidence). The evidence suggests that 246 per 1000 women achieve live birth or ongoing pregnancy with a placebo or no treatment, and 229 to 389 per 1000 will do so using vasodilators. Vasodilators compared with placebo or no treatment likely increase rates of clinical pregnancy (RR 1.45, 95% CI 1.28 to 1.64; I² = 22%; 25 RCTs, 2506 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Vasodilators compared with placebo or no treatment probably have little or no effect on rates of multiple gestation or birth (RR 1.37, 95% CI 0.73 to 2.55; I² = 0%; 7 RCTs, 763 women; moderate-certainty evidence), miscarriage (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.74; I² = 0%; 8 RCTs; 829 women; moderate-certainty evidence), and ectopic pregnancy (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.34 to 4.59; I² = 0%; 4 RCTs, 543 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Most studies found a beneficial effect of vasodilators for endometrial thickness, but the reported effect estimates varied (I² = 93%), from a mean difference of 0.47 mm higher (95% CI 0.90 mm lower to 1. 84 mm higher) to 1.94 mm higher (95% CI 1.37 higher to 2.51 mm higher), and the evidence was very uncertain. Hence, we are unsure how to interpret these results. Vasodilators versus oestrogens Vasodilators compared with oestrogens may have little or no effect on rates of live birth or ongoing pregnancy (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.33; 1 RCT, 44 women, low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain regarding the effect of sildenafil compared with oestrogens on clinical pregnancy rates (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.38; I² = 59%; 3 RCTs, 262 women; very low-certainty evidence), endometrial thickness (RR 1.90, 95 CI 1.15 to 3.13; 1 RCT, 120 women; very low-certainty evidence) and miscarriage rates (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.12; 1 RCT, 44 women; very low-certainty evidence) AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Among women undergoing fertility treatment, there may be little or no difference in the rate of live birth or ongoing pregnancy in those who receive vasodilators compared with those who receive a placebo or no treatment, and compared with those who receive oestrogens. Compared with placebo or no treatment, vasodilators likely increase rates of clinical pregnancy, but probably also increase overall rates of side effects. The evidence on clinical pregnancy with vasodilators versus oestrogens is very uncertain, and we found no evidence on overall side effects for the comparison of vasodilators versus oestrogens. We are unsure about the effect of vasodilators versus placebo or no treatment and versus oestrogens on endometrial thickness. Vasodilators versus placebo or no treatment probably have little or no effect on multiple gestation or birth, miscarriage, and ectopic pregnancy. Future studies should be adequately randomised and powered to ensure a more accurate evaluation of each treatment, with live births as a primary outcome.
期刊介绍:
The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) stands as the premier database for systematic reviews in healthcare. It comprises Cochrane Reviews, along with protocols for these reviews, editorials, and supplements. Owned and operated by Cochrane, a worldwide independent network of healthcare stakeholders, the CDSR (ISSN 1469-493X) encompasses a broad spectrum of health-related topics, including health services.