• Human reproduction open · Jan 2019

    Review

    The effectiveness of ICSI versus conventional IVF in couples with non-male factor infertility: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

    • V Q Dang, L N Vuong, T M Ho, A N Ha, Q N Nguyen, B T Truong, Q T Pham, R Wang, R J Norman, and B W Mol.
    • IVFMD, My Duc Hospital, 4 Nui Thanh, Tan Binh District, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam.
    • Hum Reprod Open. 2019 Jan 1; 2019 (2): hoz006.

    Study QuestionsDoes ICSI result in a higher live birth rate as compared with conventional IVF in couples with non-male factor infertility?What Is Known AlreadyICSI is primarily indicated for severe male factor infertility. While the use of ICSI for couples with non-male factor infertility has been increasing worldwide, this is not supported by data from randomised controlled trials. Evidence from non-randomised studies suggest no benefit from ICSI compared with conventional IVF in non-male factor infertility, if not a harm.Study Design Size DurationThis randomised, open-label, multi-centre trial aims to compare the effectiveness of one ICSI cycle and one conventional IVF cycle in infertile couples with non-male factor infertility. A total of 1064 couples will be randomly allocated to an ICSI group and a conventional IVF group. The estimated duration of the study is 30 months.Participants/Materials Setting MethodsEligible couples are those whose husbands' total sperm count and motility are normal, have undergone ≤2 previous IVF/ICSI attempts, use antagonist protocol for ovarian stimulation, agree to have ≤2 embryos transferred and are not participating in another IVF study at the same time. Women undergoing IVM cycles, using frozen semen or having a poor fertilisation (≤25%) in previous cycle will not be eligible. Couples will be randomised to undergo ICSI or conventional IVF (1:1) with ongoing pregnancy resulting in live birth after the first embryo transfer of the started treatment cycle as the primary endpoint. All analyses will be conducted on an intention-to-treat basis. Effect sizes will be summarised as relative risk (RR), with precision evaluated by 95% CIs.Study Funding/Competing InterestsAll authors declare having no conflict of interests with regards to this trial. This work was supported by a grant from MSD [MISP #57508].Trial Registration NumberNCT03428919.Trial Registration Date8 February 2018.Date Of First Patient’s Enrolment16 March 2018.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…