DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2320-6012.ijrms20151146

Predictive value of subendometrial – endometrial blood flow assessment by transvaginal 3D power doppler on the day of HCG on clinical outcome of IVF cycles

Manisha Choudhary, Jai Chowdhary, Mohan Lal Swarankar, Shiv Lal Bharadwaj

Abstract


Background: The objective of the study was to evaluate the role of subendometrial-endometrial blood flow assessment by 3D Tran-vaginal Power Doppler in predicting pregnancy outcome in IVF-ET cycles. The study was a prospective, non-randomized clinical study.

Methods: A total of 107 infertile women undergoing their first IVF-ET cycle with good response were taken for study (From March 2014 to Nov 2014 at Jaipur Fertility Centre, ART unit of Mahatma Gandhi University of Medical Sciences & Technology). Women with Tubal factor, Male factor and unexplained infertility were included in the study. Those with past h/o Genital Koch’s and hypo menorrhea were excluded. Assessment of subendometrial-endometrial blood flow was done on the day of HCG with endometrial thickness ≥ 6.5mm by Tran-vaginal 3D- Power Doppler.

Results: There was no significant difference in mean age, duration of infertility, BMI, cause of infertility, stimulation protocol, serological hormone levels, number of mature oocytes, number of good quality embryos and mean endometrial thickness on the day of HCG. According to Doppler study (3D-Power Doppler), women with blood flow to zones 1, 2 and 3 were categorized in to groups A (n=15), B (n=36) and C (n=56).  Overall pregnancy rate was 32.71%. The clinical pregnancy rate was significantly higher in Group C in comparison of Group B and A (42.85% vs. 27.77% and 6.66%). Similarly implantation rate was also higher in group C (23.20% vs. 11.22% and 2.38%).

Conclusions: The presence of good subendometrial-endometrial vascularity significantly improves pregnancy outcome in IVF-ET cycles in our study.

 


Keywords


HCG, 3D-Power Doppler, Subendometrial-endometrial blood flow

Full Text:

PDF

References


Edwards RG. Clinical approaches to increasing uterine receptivity during human implantation. Hum Reprod. 1995;10:60:6.

Noyes RW, Hertig AT, Rock J. Dating the endometrial biopsy. Fertil Steril 1950;1:3-25.

Lédéé-Bataille N, Lapréé-Delage G, Taupin JL, Dubanchet S, Frydman R, Chaovat G. Concentration of Leukaemia inhibitory factor (LIF) in uterine flushing fluid is highly predictive of embryo implantation. Hum Repord.2002;17:213-18.

Blumenfold Z, Dirnfeld M, Beck H. Comparison of treatment of uterine Leiomyomata with three GnRH agonistic analogues-efficacy and side effects. In vickery B and lunenfield B (Eds) GnRH analogues in cancer and Human Reproduction. 1990; 3:45.

Goldberg BB, Liu JB, Kuhlman K, Merton DA, Kurtz AB. Endoluminal gynaecologic ultrasound: Preliminary results. J ultrasound Med. 1991;10:583-90.

Fanchin R. Assessing uterine receptivity in 2001; Ultrasonographic glances at the new Millennium. An NY Acad Sci. 2001;943:185-202.

Schild RL, Knobloch C, Dorn C, Fimmers R, Vander Ven H, Hansmann M. Endometrial receptivity in an in-vitro fertilization program as assessed by spiral artery blood flow, endometrial thickness, endometrial volume, and uterine artery blood flow. Fertil Steril 2001;75:361-66.

Yuval Y, Liptz S, Dor J, Achiron R. The relationship between endometrial thickness and blood flow and pregnancy rate in in-vitro fertilization. Human Repord.1999;14:1967-71.

Zaidi J, Campbell S, Pittrof R, Tan SL. Endometrial thickness, morphology, vascular penetration and velocimetry in predicting implantation in in-vitro fertilization Programme. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 1995;6:191-8.

Battaglia C, Artini PG, Giulini S, Salvatori M, Maxia N, Petraglia F et al . Colour Doppler changes and thromboxane production after ovarian stimulation with GnRH agonist. Hum Repord;1997; 11:2477-82.

Yang JH, Wu MY, Chen CD, Jiang MC, Ho HN, Yang YS. Association of endometrial blood flow as determined by a modified Colour Doppler technique with subsequent outcome of in-vitro fertilization. Hum Repord.1999;14;1606-10.

Jarvela IY, Sladkevicims P, Kelly S, Ojha K, Campbell S, Nargund G. Evaluation of endometrial receptivity during in-vitro fertilization using three-dimensional Power Doppler ultrasound. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2005;26:765-9.

Kupesic S, Bekavac I, Bjelos D, Kurjak A. Assessment of endometrial receptivity by Transvaginal colour Doppler and three dimensional Power Doppler Ultrasonography in patients undergoing in-vitro fertilization procedures. J Ultrasound Med.2001;20:125-34.

Ng EH, Chan CC, Tang OS, Yeung WS, Ho PC. The role of endometrial and subendometrial blood flows measured by three-dimensional Power Doppler Ultrasound in the prediction of pregnancy during IVF treatment. Hum Reprod.2006; 21:164-170.

Wu HM, Chiang CH, Huang HY, Chao AS, Wang HS, Soong YK. Detection of the subendometrial vascularisation flow index by three-dimensional ultrasound may be useful for predicating the pregnancy rate for patients undergoing in-vitro fertilization-embryo transfer. Fertil Steril.2003;79:507-11.

Applebaum M. The uterine biophysical profile ultrasound. Obstet Gynecol.1995; 5:67-8.

Chien LW, Au HK, Chew PL, Xiao J. Assessment of uterine receptivity by the endometrial-subendometrial blood flow distribution pattern in women undergoing in-vitro fertilization-embryo transfer. Fertil-Steril. 2002;78:245-51.

Dechaud H, Bessueille E, Bosquet PJ, et al. Optimal timing of Ultrasonographic and Doppler evaluation of uterine receptivity to implantation. Repord. Biomed online 2008;16(3):368-75.

Merce LT, Barco MJ, Bau S. et al. Are endometrial parameters by three-dimensional ultrasound and power Doppler angiography related to in-vitro fertilization/embryo transfer outcome? Fertil Steril 2008;89(1):111-17.

Bassil S. Changes in endometrial thickness, width, length and pattern in predicting pregnancy outcome during ovarian stimulation in in-vitro fertilization. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol.2001; 18:258-63.

Wang L, Qiao J, Li R. et al. Role of endometrial blood flow assessment with colour Doppler energy in predicting pregnancy outcome- Reprod. Biol Endocrinol 2010; 18(8):122.