Sine Berntsen, Anne Zedeler, Bugge Nøhr, Morten Rønn Petersen, Marie Louise Grøndahl, Lars Franch Andersen, Kristine Løssl, Ellen Løkkegaard, Anne Lis Englund, Anette Vestergaard Gabrielsen, Lisbeth Prætorius, Ida Behrendt-Møller, Lea Langhoff Thuesen, Kilian Vomstein, Mette Petri Lauritsen, Aleksandra Ivanoska Trajcevski, Dea Frøding Skipper, David Westergaard, Anja Pinborg, Henriette Svarre Nielsen, Nina la Cour Freiesleben
{"title":"无严重男性因素不育患者的IVF与ICSI:一项随机临床试验","authors":"Sine Berntsen, Anne Zedeler, Bugge Nøhr, Morten Rønn Petersen, Marie Louise Grøndahl, Lars Franch Andersen, Kristine Løssl, Ellen Løkkegaard, Anne Lis Englund, Anette Vestergaard Gabrielsen, Lisbeth Prætorius, Ida Behrendt-Møller, Lea Langhoff Thuesen, Kilian Vomstein, Mette Petri Lauritsen, Aleksandra Ivanoska Trajcevski, Dea Frøding Skipper, David Westergaard, Anja Pinborg, Henriette Svarre Nielsen, Nina la Cour Freiesleben","doi":"10.1038/s41591-025-03621-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) and conventional in vitro fertilization (c-IVF) are widely used fertilization techniques in assisted reproduction, but their relative effectiveness in patients without severe male factor infertility remains debated. While ICSI’s role in couples with severe male factor infertility is well established, its routine use in cases with normal or nonseverely decreased sperm quality is not evidence-based. Here we conducted the INVICSI study, an open-label, multicenter randomized controlled trial, to compare cumulative live birth rates (CLBR) as the primary outcome between ICSI and c-IVF in patients without severe male factor infertility. Between November 2019 and December 2022, 824 women undergoing their first IVF cycle were randomized to ICSI (<i>n</i> = 414) or c-IVF (<i>n</i> = 410) across six public fertility clinics in Denmark. The CLBR was 43.2% (179/414) in the ICSI group and 47.3% (193/408) in the c-IVF group, yielding a risk ratio of 0.91 (95% confidence interval, 0.79–1.06). These findings demonstrate that ICSI does not improve CLBR compared to c-IVF and support c-IVF as the preferred first-line treatment for patients with normal or nonseverely decreased sperm quality. ICSI should be reserved for severe male factor infertility. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT04128904.</p>","PeriodicalId":19037,"journal":{"name":"Nature Medicine","volume":"4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":58.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"IVF versus ICSI in patients without severe male factor infertility: a randomized clinical trial\",\"authors\":\"Sine Berntsen, Anne Zedeler, Bugge Nøhr, Morten Rønn Petersen, Marie Louise Grøndahl, Lars Franch Andersen, Kristine Løssl, Ellen Løkkegaard, Anne Lis Englund, Anette Vestergaard Gabrielsen, Lisbeth Prætorius, Ida Behrendt-Møller, Lea Langhoff Thuesen, Kilian Vomstein, Mette Petri Lauritsen, Aleksandra Ivanoska Trajcevski, Dea Frøding Skipper, David Westergaard, Anja Pinborg, Henriette Svarre Nielsen, Nina la Cour Freiesleben\",\"doi\":\"10.1038/s41591-025-03621-x\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p>Intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) and conventional in vitro fertilization (c-IVF) are widely used fertilization techniques in assisted reproduction, but their relative effectiveness in patients without severe male factor infertility remains debated. While ICSI’s role in couples with severe male factor infertility is well established, its routine use in cases with normal or nonseverely decreased sperm quality is not evidence-based. Here we conducted the INVICSI study, an open-label, multicenter randomized controlled trial, to compare cumulative live birth rates (CLBR) as the primary outcome between ICSI and c-IVF in patients without severe male factor infertility. Between November 2019 and December 2022, 824 women undergoing their first IVF cycle were randomized to ICSI (<i>n</i> = 414) or c-IVF (<i>n</i> = 410) across six public fertility clinics in Denmark. The CLBR was 43.2% (179/414) in the ICSI group and 47.3% (193/408) in the c-IVF group, yielding a risk ratio of 0.91 (95% confidence interval, 0.79–1.06). These findings demonstrate that ICSI does not improve CLBR compared to c-IVF and support c-IVF as the preferred first-line treatment for patients with normal or nonseverely decreased sperm quality. ICSI should be reserved for severe male factor infertility. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT04128904.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19037,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Nature Medicine\",\"volume\":\"4 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":58.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-11\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Nature Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-025-03621-x\",\"RegionNum\":1,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Nature Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1038/s41591-025-03621-x","RegionNum":1,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"BIOCHEMISTRY & MOLECULAR BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
IVF versus ICSI in patients without severe male factor infertility: a randomized clinical trial
Intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) and conventional in vitro fertilization (c-IVF) are widely used fertilization techniques in assisted reproduction, but their relative effectiveness in patients without severe male factor infertility remains debated. While ICSI’s role in couples with severe male factor infertility is well established, its routine use in cases with normal or nonseverely decreased sperm quality is not evidence-based. Here we conducted the INVICSI study, an open-label, multicenter randomized controlled trial, to compare cumulative live birth rates (CLBR) as the primary outcome between ICSI and c-IVF in patients without severe male factor infertility. Between November 2019 and December 2022, 824 women undergoing their first IVF cycle were randomized to ICSI (n = 414) or c-IVF (n = 410) across six public fertility clinics in Denmark. The CLBR was 43.2% (179/414) in the ICSI group and 47.3% (193/408) in the c-IVF group, yielding a risk ratio of 0.91 (95% confidence interval, 0.79–1.06). These findings demonstrate that ICSI does not improve CLBR compared to c-IVF and support c-IVF as the preferred first-line treatment for patients with normal or nonseverely decreased sperm quality. ICSI should be reserved for severe male factor infertility. ClinicalTrials.gov registration: NCT04128904.
期刊介绍:
Nature Medicine is a monthly journal publishing original peer-reviewed research in all areas of medicine. The publication focuses on originality, timeliness, interdisciplinary interest, and the impact on improving human health. In addition to research articles, Nature Medicine also publishes commissioned content such as News, Reviews, and Perspectives. This content aims to provide context for the latest advances in translational and clinical research, reaching a wide audience of M.D. and Ph.D. readers. All editorial decisions for the journal are made by a team of full-time professional editors.
Nature Medicine consider all types of clinical research, including:
-Case-reports and small case series
-Clinical trials, whether phase 1, 2, 3 or 4
-Observational studies
-Meta-analyses
-Biomarker studies
-Public and global health studies
Nature Medicine is also committed to facilitating communication between translational and clinical researchers. As such, we consider “hybrid” studies with preclinical and translational findings reported alongside data from clinical studies.