反复着床失败的女性是否有理由宫内输注自体PRP ?

IF 6 1区 医学 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Evangelia T Katsika, Christos A Venetis, Julia K Bosdou, Efstratios M Kolibianakis
{"title":"反复着床失败的女性是否有理由宫内输注自体PRP ?","authors":"Evangelia T Katsika, Christos A Venetis, Julia K Bosdou, Efstratios M Kolibianakis","doi":"10.1093/humrep/deaf014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In recent years, an increased interest in the efficacy of intrauterine infusion of autologous platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in women with repeated implantation failure (RIF) has resulted in the publication of 13 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 11 meta-analyses. Although these meta-analyses support an increase in pregnancy rates after intrauterine infusion of autologous PRP, the low quality of the available original clinical studies along with concerns regarding their trustworthiness seriously questions their internal validity and does not allow for definitive conclusions to be drawn. In addition, the variability in the definition of RIF used in the individual studies limits their external validity, renders the pooling of the results problematic, and, overall, complicates the extrapolation of the results published. The variability in the definition of RIF has been recently addressed by the ESHRE, which published an evidence-based definition of RIF to facilitate the evaluation of interventions in these patients. Taking into consideration this definition, which identifies a real clinical problem, evaluation of intrauterine infusion of PRP in the published literature has not so far been performed explicitly in patients with RIF. The potential of intrauterine infusion of autologous PRP to improve outcomes for women with RIF remains an important area of research in ART. However, the current evidence is insufficient to inform clinical practice, highlighting the need for well-designed studies to provide clearer guidance.</p>","PeriodicalId":13003,"journal":{"name":"Human reproduction","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":6.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Is it justified to offer intrauterine infusion of autologous PRP in women with repeated implantation failure?\",\"authors\":\"Evangelia T Katsika, Christos A Venetis, Julia K Bosdou, Efstratios M Kolibianakis\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/humrep/deaf014\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In recent years, an increased interest in the efficacy of intrauterine infusion of autologous platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in women with repeated implantation failure (RIF) has resulted in the publication of 13 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 11 meta-analyses. Although these meta-analyses support an increase in pregnancy rates after intrauterine infusion of autologous PRP, the low quality of the available original clinical studies along with concerns regarding their trustworthiness seriously questions their internal validity and does not allow for definitive conclusions to be drawn. In addition, the variability in the definition of RIF used in the individual studies limits their external validity, renders the pooling of the results problematic, and, overall, complicates the extrapolation of the results published. The variability in the definition of RIF has been recently addressed by the ESHRE, which published an evidence-based definition of RIF to facilitate the evaluation of interventions in these patients. Taking into consideration this definition, which identifies a real clinical problem, evaluation of intrauterine infusion of PRP in the published literature has not so far been performed explicitly in patients with RIF. The potential of intrauterine infusion of autologous PRP to improve outcomes for women with RIF remains an important area of research in ART. However, the current evidence is insufficient to inform clinical practice, highlighting the need for well-designed studies to provide clearer guidance.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13003,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Human reproduction\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":6.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-03-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Human reproduction\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deaf014\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Human reproduction","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deaf014","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

近年来,人们对子宫内输注自体富血小板血浆(PRP)治疗反复着床失败(RIF)妇女的疗效越来越感兴趣,已经发表了13项随机对照试验(rct)和11项荟萃分析。尽管这些荟萃分析支持宫内输注自体PRP后妊娠率增加,但现有原始临床研究的低质量以及对其可信度的担忧严重质疑其内部有效性,并且无法得出明确的结论。此外,在个别研究中使用的RIF定义的可变性限制了它们的外部有效性,使得结果的汇集存在问题,并且总体而言,使已发表结果的外推复杂化。最近,ESHRE解决了RIF定义的可变性问题,并发布了一份基于证据的RIF定义,以促进对这些患者的干预措施的评估。考虑到这一定义确定了一个真正的临床问题,迄今为止,在已发表的文献中尚未明确对RIF患者宫内输注PRP进行评估。子宫内输注自体PRP改善RIF妇女预后的潜力仍然是ART研究的一个重要领域。然而,目前的证据不足以为临床实践提供信息,强调需要精心设计的研究来提供更清晰的指导。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Is it justified to offer intrauterine infusion of autologous PRP in women with repeated implantation failure?

In recent years, an increased interest in the efficacy of intrauterine infusion of autologous platelet-rich plasma (PRP) in women with repeated implantation failure (RIF) has resulted in the publication of 13 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 11 meta-analyses. Although these meta-analyses support an increase in pregnancy rates after intrauterine infusion of autologous PRP, the low quality of the available original clinical studies along with concerns regarding their trustworthiness seriously questions their internal validity and does not allow for definitive conclusions to be drawn. In addition, the variability in the definition of RIF used in the individual studies limits their external validity, renders the pooling of the results problematic, and, overall, complicates the extrapolation of the results published. The variability in the definition of RIF has been recently addressed by the ESHRE, which published an evidence-based definition of RIF to facilitate the evaluation of interventions in these patients. Taking into consideration this definition, which identifies a real clinical problem, evaluation of intrauterine infusion of PRP in the published literature has not so far been performed explicitly in patients with RIF. The potential of intrauterine infusion of autologous PRP to improve outcomes for women with RIF remains an important area of research in ART. However, the current evidence is insufficient to inform clinical practice, highlighting the need for well-designed studies to provide clearer guidance.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Human reproduction
Human reproduction 医学-妇产科学
CiteScore
10.90
自引率
6.60%
发文量
1369
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Human Reproduction features full-length, peer-reviewed papers reporting original research, concise clinical case reports, as well as opinions and debates on topical issues. Papers published cover the clinical science and medical aspects of reproductive physiology, pathology and endocrinology; including andrology, gonad function, gametogenesis, fertilization, embryo development, implantation, early pregnancy, genetics, genetic diagnosis, oncology, infectious disease, surgery, contraception, infertility treatment, psychology, ethics and social issues.
×
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