Efficacy of therapies and interventions for repeated embryo implantation failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Andrea Busnelli, Edgardo Somigliana, Federico Cirillo, Annamaria Baggiani, Paolo Emanuele Levi-Setti

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

The aim of the present systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the effect of the different therapeutic options for repeated embryo implantation failure (RIF) on a subsequent IVF cycle outcome. Twenty-two RCTs and nineteen observational studies were included. Pooling of results showed a beneficial effect of intrauterine PBMC infusion on both CPR (RR 2.18; 95% CI 1.58–3.00; p < 0.00001; OR 2.03; 95% CI 1.22–3.36; p = 0.006) and LBR (RR 2.41; 95% CI 1.40–4.16; p = 0.002; OR 3.73; 95% CI 1.13–12.29; p = 0.03), of subcutaneous G-CSF administration on CPR (RR 2.29; 95% CI 1.58–3.31; p < 0.0001) and of intrauterine PRP infusion on CPR (RR 2.45; 95% CI 1.55–3.86; p = 0.0001). Observational studies also demonstrated a positive effect of IVIG and intrauterine hCG infusion on both CPR and LBR and of atosiban on CPR. Studies investigating intrauterine G-CSF infusion, LMWH, intravenous intralipid, hysteroscopy, blastocyst-stage ET, ZIFT, PGT-A and AH failed to observe an impact on IVF outcome. The quality of the evidence that emerged from RCTs focused on intrauterine PBMC infusion and subcutaneous G-CSF administration was moderate. For all other therapies/interventions it varied from low to very low. In conclusion, intrauterine PBMC infusion and subcutaneous G-CSF administration are the most promising therapeutic options for RIF. However, further well conducted RCTs are necessary before their introduction into clinical practice.

Original languageEnglish
Article number1747
JournalScientific Reports
Volume11
Issue number1
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - Dec 2021

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • General

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Efficacy of therapies and interventions for repeated embryo implantation failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this