Ultrasound guidance versus classical method for intrauterine insemination: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE\nThere is a great controversy regarding the benefits of ultrasound-guided intrauterine insemination (IUI) in improving pregnancy rates. Thus, we aimed to compare ultrasound-guided IUI versus classical IUI regarding the pregnancy rates improvement.\n\n\nMETHODS\nA systematic search was done in Cochrane Library, PubMed, ISI web of science, and Scopus during June 2021. We selected randomized clinical trials (RCTs) that compared ultrasound-guided IUI versus classical IUI in different pregnancy outcomes. We extracted the available data from included studies and pooled them in a meta-analysis model using RevMan software. Our primary outcome was clinical pregnancy rate. Our secondary outcomes were miscarriage, live birth rates, and incidence of difficulty reported during the procedure. The overall quality of evidence was assessed through GRADEpro GDT software.\n\n\nRESULTS\nSeven RCTs met our inclusion criteria with a total number of 1338 patients. We found that ultrasound-guided IUI significantly improved the clinical pregnancy rate when compared to the classical group (RR\u202f=\u202f1.33, 95% CI [1.05, 1.68], p\u202f=\u202f0.02). However, there were no significant differences between both groups in terms of miscarriage and live birth rates. Ultrasound-guided IUI significantly reduced the incidence of difficulty reported during the procedure (RR\u202f=\u202f0.42, 95% CI [0.21, 0.84], p\u202f=\u202f0.01). The GRADEpro GDT tool showed high quality of evidence for the evaluated outcomes.\n\n\nCONCLUSIONS\nThere is evidence of high quality that ultrasound-guided IUI improves the pregnancy rate and reduces the incidence of difficulty reported during the procedure.