Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Assisted reproduction outcomes after embryo transfers requiring a malleable stylet

  • ASSISTED REPRODUCTION TECHNOLOGIES
  • Published:
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objective

This retrospective case–control study was undertaken to assess the impact of a malleable stylet application on embryo transfer (ET) outcome.

Methods

The Wallace malleable stylet was used when the soft inner catheter could not negotiate the internal os during ultrasound-guided ET. Patients having an age ≤37 years, with three embryos replaced were included in the analysis. Implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rate and live birth rate were the main outcome measures.

Results

The Wallace malleable stylet was applied in 164 (29.6%) of the 553 ETs evaluated. Implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rate and live birth rate showed a 5.6% (19.4% vs. 13.8%), a 10.8% (41.9% vs. 31.1%) and a 9.9% (37.3% vs. 27.4%) absolute difference, respectively, in favor of ETs not requiring the stylet. These differences were statistically significant (P < 0.05).

Conclusions

ETs requiring stylet are associated with lower implantation, clinical pregnancy and live birth rates.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Mains L, Van Voorhis BJ. Optimizing the technique of embryo transfer. Fertil Steril. 2010;94:785–90.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Mansour R, Aboulghar M, Serour G. Dummy embryo transfer: a technique that minimizes the problems of embryo transfer and improves the pregnancy rate in human in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 1990;54:678–81.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Buckett WM. A review and meta-analysis of prospective trials comparing different catheters used for embryo transfer. Fertil Steril. 2006;85:728–34.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Brown JA, Buckingham K, Abou-Setta A, Buckett W. Ultrasound versus ‘clinical touch’ for catheter guidance during embryo transfer in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;24:CD006107.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Nygren KG, Sullivan E, Zegers-Hochschild F, Mansour R, Ishihara O, Adamson GD, de Mouzon J. International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technology (ICMART) world report: assisted reproductive technology 2003. Fertil Steril. 2011;95:2209–22. 2222.e1–17.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Nielsen IK, Lindhard A, Loft A, Ziebe S, Andersen AN. A Wallace malleable stylet for difficult embryo transfer in an in vitro fertilization program: a case–control study. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2002;8:133–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Rienzi L, Ubaldi F, Anniballo R, Cerulo G, Greco E. Preincubation of human oocytes may improve fertilization and embryo quality after intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Hum Reprod. 1998;13:1014–9.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Karande V, Hazlett D, Vietzke M, Gleicher N. A prospective randomized comparison of the Wallace catheter and the Cook Echo- Tip(R) catheter for ultrasound-guided embryo transfer. Fertil Steril. 2002;77:826–30.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. van Weering HG, Schats R, McDonnell J, Vink JM, Vermeiden JP, Hompes PG. The impact of the embryo transfer catheter on the pregnancy rate in IVF. Hum Reprod. 2002;17(3):666–70.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Silberstein T, Weitzen S, Frankfurter D, Trimarchi JR, Keefe DL, Plosker SM. Cannulation of a resistant internal os with the malleable outer sheath of a coaxial soft embryo transfer catheter does not affect in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer outcome. Fertil Steril. 2004;82(5):1402–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Hearns-Stokes RM, Miller BT, Scott L, Creuss D, Chakraborty PK, Segars JH. Pregnancy rates after embryo transfer depend on the provider at embryo transfer. Fertil Steril. 2000;74(1):80–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Lesny P, Killick SR, Tetlow RL, Robinson J, Maguiness SD. Embryo transfer—can we learn anything new from the observation of junctional zone contractions? Hum Reprod. 1998;13(6):1540–6.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Fanchin R, Righini C, Olivennes F, Taylor S, de Ziegler D, Frydman R. Uterine contractions at the time of embryo transfer alter pregnancy rates after in-vitro fertilization. Hum Reprod. 1998;13(7):1968–74.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflict of interests

The Authors declare no potential conflict of interest.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Unità di Procreazione Medicalmente Assistita, Dipartimento di Medicina e Scienze dell’Invecchiamento, Facoltà di Medicina e Chirurgia, Università “G. d’Annunzio”, Chieti-Pescara, Ospedale “Bernabeo”, Ortona, Chieti, Italy

    Gian Mario Tiboni, Enrica Concetta Colangelo, Emiliana Leonzio & Elisabetta Gabriele

Authors
  1. Gian Mario Tiboni
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Enrica Concetta Colangelo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Emiliana Leonzio
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Elisabetta Gabriele
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Gian Mario Tiboni.

Additional information

Capsule

Embryo transfer represents a crucial step in assisted reproduction procedures. We found that difficult embryo transfers requiring the use of a malleable stylet result in a poorer ART outcome

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Tiboni, G.M., Colangelo, E.C., Leonzio, E. et al. Assisted reproduction outcomes after embryo transfers requiring a malleable stylet. J Assist Reprod Genet 29, 585–588 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-012-9743-9

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-012-9743-9

Keywords

Search

Navigation