CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 289Reproductive Health and TechnologiesAssisted Reproductive Technology and Twin PregnancyReproductive System and Pregnancy

Endometrial injury in women undergoing assisted reproductive techniques

Open access
Nastri, Carolina, Lensen, Sarah, Gibreel, Ahmed, Raine-Fenning, Nick, Ferriani, Rui, Bhattacharya, Siladitya, Martins, Wellington·2015·Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
DOI 10.1002/14651858.cd009517.pub3
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Implantation of an embryo within the endometrial cavity is a critical step in assisted reproductive techniques (ART). Previous research has suggested that endometrial injury - intentional damage to the endometrium - can increase the probability of pregnancy in women undergoing ART. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of endometrial injury performed before embryo transfer in women undergoing ART. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group (MDSG) Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), the Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Latin American Caribbean Health Sciences Literature (LILACS) and ClinicalTrials.gov. The original search was performed in November 2011, and further searches were done in March 2014 and January 2015. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials comparing intentional endometrial injury before embryo transfer in women undergoing ART, versus no intervention or a sham procedure. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two independent review authors screened studies and extracted data which were checked by a third review author. Two review authors independently assessed risk of bias. We contacted and corresponded with study investigators as required and analysed data using risk ratio (RR) and a random-effects model. We assessed the quality of the evidence by using GRADE (Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) criteria. MAIN RESULTS: We included 14 trials that included 1063 women in the intervention groups and 1065 women in the control groups. Thirteen studies compared endometrial injury performed between day 7 of the previous cycle and day 7 of the embryo transfer (ET) cycle versus no injury, and one study compared endometrial injury on the day of oocyte retrieval versus no injury. Overall, eight of the 14 included studies were deemed to be at high risk of bias in at least one domain.In studies comparing endometrial injury performed between day 7 of the previous cycle and day 7 of the ET cycle versus no intervention or a sham procedure, endometrial injury was associated with an increase in live birth or ongoing pregnancy rate: RR 1.42, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.08 to 1.85; P value 0.01; nine RCTs; 1496 women; I² = 53%; moderate-quality evidence. In other words, moderate-quality evidence suggests that if 26% of women achieve live birth without endometrial injury, between 28% and 48% will achieve live birth with endometrial injury. A sensitivity analysis removing the studies at high risk of bias showed no difference in effect.There was no evidence of an effect on miscarriage, however the evidence is of low-quality: RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.53; P value 0.06; eight RCTs; 500 clinical pregnancies; I² = 10%; low-quality evidence.Endometrial injury was also associated with an increased clinical pregnancy rate: RR 1.34, 95% CI 1.21 to 1.61; P value 0.002; 13 RCTs; 1972 women; I² = 45%; moderate-quality evidence. This suggests that if 30% of women achieve clinical pregnancy without endometrial injury, between 33% and 48% will achieve clinical pregnancy with this intervention.Endometrial injury was associated with increased pain, however the evidence was of very low quality. One study reported pain on a VAS scale: MD 4.60, 95% CI 3.98 to 5.22; P value < 0.00001; one RCT; 158 women. Two studies reported the number of pain complaints after the procedure; one recorded no events in either group, and the other reported that endometrial injury increased pain complaints: OR 8.65, 95% CI 2.49 to 30.10; P value 0.0007; one RCT; 101 women.Results from the only randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing endometrial injury on the day of oocyte retrieval versus no injury, reported that this endometrial injury markedly decreased live birth (RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.14 to 0.69; P value 0.004; 156 women; low-quality evidence) and clinical pregnancy (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.71; P value 0.003; one RCT; 156 women; low-quality evidence). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Moderate-quality evidence indicates that endometrial injury performed between day 7 of the previous cycle and day 7 of the embryo transfer (ET) cycle is associated with an improvement in live birth and clinical pregnancy rates in women with more than two previous embryo transfers. There is no evidence of an effect on miscarriage, multiple pregnancy or bleeding. The procedure is mildly painful. Endometrial injury on the day of oocyte retrieval is associated with a reduction of clinical and ongoing pregnancy rates.Although current evidence suggests some benefit of endometrial injury, we need evidence from well-designed trials that avoid instrumentation of the uterus in the preceding three months, do not cause endometrial damage in the control group, stratify the results for women with and without recurrent implantation failure (RIF) an

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1002/14651858.cd009517.pub3

Cites

44 of 44 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • RCTs and meta-analyses in the IVF/ICSI context have failed to show a reduction in miscarriage rates with endometrial scratch/injury.

    “although to date RCTs and meta-analyses in this patient group have failed to show a reduction in miscarriage rates.205,206”

    From Recurrent MiscarriageGreen‐top Guideline No. 17 (2023) · cites this paper as [205]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

1 retracted

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Nastri, C., Lensen, S., Gibreel, A., Raine-Fenning, N., Ferriani, R., Bhattacharya, S., & Martins, W.
Affiliations
  • Universidade de São Paulo (BR)
  • University of Auckland (NZ)
  • Mansoura University (EG)
  • Aberdeen Maternity Hospital (GB)
ORCID
Venue
Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2015-03-22
Issue
3
Pages
CD009517-CD009517
ISSN
  • 1361-6137 (ISSN-L)
  • 1465-1858
DOI
10.1002/14651858.cd009517.pub3
OpenAlex
W1488278893
Cited by
289
References
44
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 20 · 2021: 30 · 2020: 32 · 2019: 34 · 2018: 28 · 2017: 23 · 2016: 44 · 2015: 16 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 14 · 2012: 3
FWCI
5.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Update notices
new_version (2021-06-10)
Open access
Locations
  • Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Aberdeen University Research Archive (Aberdeen University) (submittedVersion)
  • ORCA Online Research @Cardiff (Cardiff University) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Reproductive Health and Technologies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pediatrics, Perinatology and Child Health › Assisted Reproductive Technology and Twin Pregnancy
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Reproductive System and Pregnancy
Keywords
endometrial injury, assisted reproduction, embryo transfer, endometrial scratching, live birth rate, ongoing pregnancy rate, subfertility, endometrial receptivity, pregnancy outcomes, oocyte retrieval
MeSH terms
Abortion, Spontaneous, Endometrium, Female, Humans, Ovulation Induction, Embryo Implantation, Pregnancy, Pregnancy, Multiple, Probability, Time Factors, Odds Ratio, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Pregnancy Rate, Reproductive Techniques, Assisted, Live Birth, Oocyte Retrieval

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review