Cited by 307Reproductive Health and TechnologiesReproductive System and PregnancyReproductive Biology and Fertility

Prediction of implantation by the sonographic appearance of the endometrium during controlled ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization (IVF)

Gonen, Yael, Casper, Robert F.·1990·Journal of In Vitro Fertilization and Embryo Transfer

Abstract

The texture and the thickness of the endometrium as assessed by transvaginal sonography were prospectively evaluated in 123 patients undergoing IVF treatment. Three different types of endometrial patterns could be distinguished: (A) an entirely homogenous, hyperechogenic endometrium; (B) an intermediate type characterized by the same reflectivity of ultrasound as the myometrium, with a nonprominent or absent central echogenic line; and (C) a multilayered endometrium consisting of prominent outer and midline hyperechogenic lines and inner hypoechogenic regions. On the day before oocyte retrieval, endometrial thickness was significantly greater in the group of patients who achieved pregnancy than in the group who did not (8.7 +/- 0.4 vs 7.5 +/- 0.2 mm, respectively; P less than 0.01) and significantly more patients had multilayered, pattern C, endometrium (75% in pregnant women vs 42.4% in nonpregnant women; P less than 0.01). No pregnancy occurred when the endometrial thickness was less than 6 mm. When type C endometrium greater than or equal to 6 mm thick was seen, the pregnancy rate per embryo transfer was 39%. When type A or B endometrial pattern was seen, the negative predictive value for the occurrence of pregnancy was 90.5%. Our results suggest that transvaginal sonographic evaluation of endometrial texture and thickness may be an indicator of the likelihood of achieving pregnancy.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1007/bf01135678

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gonen, Y., & Casper, R. F.
Affiliations
University of Toronto (CA)
Venue
Journal of In Vitro Fertilization and Embryo Transfer
Published
1990-06
Volume
7
Issue
3
Pages
146-152
ISSN
  • 0740-7769 (ISSN-L)
  • 1573-7330
OpenAlex
W2049892039
Cited by
307
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 9 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 11 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 16 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 10 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 10 · 2012: 15
FWCI
6.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Reproductive Medicine › Reproductive Health and Technologies
  • Life Sciences › Immunology and Microbiology › Immunology › Reproductive System and Pregnancy
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Reproductive Biology and Fertility
Keywords
endometrial thickness, transvaginal ultrasound, implantation prediction, controlled ovarian stimulation, in vitro fertilization, pregnancy rate, embryo transfer, negative predictive value
MeSH terms
Adult, Clomiphene, Endometrium, Estradiol, Female, Fertilization in Vitro, Humans, Luteinizing Hormone, Ovulation Induction, Embryo Implantation, Pregnancy, Prospective Studies, Ultrasonography

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