Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Ovulation induction and intrauterine insemination in women of advanced reproductive age: a systematic review of the literature

  • Review
  • Published:
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

The objective of this review is to define live birth rate (LBR) and clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) for women ≥ 40 undergoing ovulation induction (OI)/intrauterine insemination (IUI).

Methods

A systematic review was performed in accordance with PRISMA guidelines using PubMed and Google Scholar. The primary and secondary outcomes of interest were LBR and CPR, respectively.

Results

There were 636 studies screened of which 42 were included. In 8 studies which provided LBR for partner sperm, LBR/cycle ranged from 0 to 8.5% with majority being ≤ 4%. Cumulative LBR was 3.6 to 7.1% over 6 cycles with the majority of pregnancies in the first 4. In the four studies providing LBR for donor sperm cycles, LBR/cycle ranged from 3 to 7% with cumulative LBR of 12 to 24% over 6 cycles. The majority of pregnancies occurred in the first 6 cycles. There were three studies with LBR or CPR/cycle ≥ 1% for women ≥ 43. No studies provided data above this range for women ≥ 45. In 4 studies which compared OI/IUI and IVF, the LBR from IVF was 9.2 to 22% per cycle. In 7 studies which compared outcomes by stimulation protocol, no significant differences were seen.

Conclusion

For women ≥ 40 using homologous sperm, the highest probability of live birth is via IVF. However, if IVF is not an option, OI/IUI may be considered for up to 4 cycles in those using partner sperm or 6 cycles with donor sperm. For women > 45, OI/IUI is likely futile but a limited trial may be considered for psychological benefit while encouraging consideration of donor oocyte IVF or adoption. Use of gonadotropins does not appear to be more effective than oral agents in this age group.

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

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Allahbadia G. Intrauterine insemination: fundamentals revisited. J Obstet Gynaecol India. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13224-017-1060-x.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Cheung L. Patient selection for assisted reproductive technology treatments. Hong Kong Med J. 2000;6:177–83.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Dodson WC, Haney AF. Controlled ovarian hyperstimulation and intrauterine insemination for treatment of infertility. Fertil Steril. 1991. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(16)54168-5.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM). Evidence-based treatments for couples with unexplained infertility: a guideline. Fertil Steril. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.10.014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Schlegel PN, Sigman M, Collura B, De Jonge CJ, Eisenberg ML, Lamb DJ, et al. Diagnosis and treatment of infertility in men: AUA/ASRM guideline part II. J Urol. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1097/JU.0000000000001520.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG). ACOG committee opinion no. 586: Health disparities in rural women. Obstet Gynecol. 2014; https://doi.org/10.1097/01.AOG.0000443278.06393.d6.

  7. American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM). Disparities in access to effective treatment for infertility in the United States: an Ethics Committee Opinion. Fertil Steril. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.07.1139.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Harris JA, Menke MN, Haefner JK, Moniz MH, Perumalswami CR. Geographic access to assisted reproductive technology health care in the United States: a population-based cross-sectional study. Fertil Steril. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.02.101.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists (ACOG) and American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM). Committee Opinion No. 589: age related fertility decline. Fertil Steril. 2014; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.12.032

  10. Broekmans FJ, Klinkert ER. Female age in ART: when to stop? Gynecol Obstet Invest. 2004. https://doi.org/10.1159/000080794.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. O’Connor KA, Holman DJ, Wood JW. Declining fecundity and ovarian ageing in natural fertility populations. Am J Human Biol. 1998. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0378-5122(98)00068-1.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Schwartz D, Mayaux MJ. Female fecundity as a function of age: results of artificial insemination in 2193 nulliparous women with azoospermic husbands. N Engl J Med. 1982. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJM198202183060706.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Armstrong S, Akande V. What is the best treatment option for infertile women aged 40 and over? J Assist Reprod Genet. 2013. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-013-9980-6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Cabry R, Merviel P, Hazout A, Belloc S, Dalleac A, Copin H, et al. Management of infertility in women over 40. Maturitas. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.maturitas.2014.02.014.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Liu K, Case A. Advanced reproductive age and fertility. J Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2011. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1701-2163(16)35087-3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Ludwig AK, Diedrich K, Ludwig M. The process of decision-making in reproductive medicine. Semin Reprod Med. 2005. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2005-923392.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Marinakis G, Nikolaou D. National survey of the current management of infertility in women aged 40 and over in the UK. Obstet Gynaecol. 2012. https://doi.org/10.3109/01443615.2012.663424.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Tsafrir A, Simon A, Margalioth EJ, Laufer N. What should be the first-line treatment for unexplained infertility in women over 40 years of age-ovulation induction and IUI or IVF? Reprod Biomed Online. 2009;19:4334.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Maxwell E, Mathews M, Mulay S. The impact of access barriers on fertility treatment decision making: a qualitative study from the perspectives of patients and service providers. Obstet Gynaecol Can. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jogc.2017.08.025.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Weigel G, Ranji U, Long M, Salganicoff A. Coverage and use of fertility services in the U.S. Kaiser family foundation website. Accessed Sep 4, 2021. https://www.kff.org/womens-health-policy/issue-brief/coverage-and-use-of-fertility-services-in-the-u-s/.

  21. American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM). Fertility treatment when the prognosis is very poor or futile: an Ethics Committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.01.033.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Moher D, Liberati A, Tetzlaff J, Altman DG. The PRISMA group preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med. 2009. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1000097.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Haebe J, Martin J, Tekepety F, Tummon I, Shepherd K. Success of intrauterine insemination in women aged 40–42 years. Fertil Steril. 2002. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(02)03168-0.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Agarwal SK, Buyalos RP. Clomiphene citrate with intrauterine insemination: is it effective therapy in women above the age of 35 years? Fertil Steril. 1996. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0015-0282(16)58210-7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Dovey S, Sneeringer RM, Penzias AS. Clomiphene citrate and intrauterine insemination: analysis of more than 4100 cycles. Fertil Steril. 2008. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.10.057.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Ferrara I, Balet R, Grudzinskas JG. Intrauterine insemination with frozen donor sperm. Pregnancy outcome in relation to age and ovarian stimulation regime. Hum Reprod. 2002. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/17.9.2320.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Gomez R, Schorsch M, Steetskamp J, Hahn T, Heidner K, Seufert R, et al. The effect of ovarian stimulation on the outcome of intrauterine insemination. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-013-2952-3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Steiner N, Ruiter-Ligeti J, Frank R, Al Shatti M, Badeghiesh A, Rotshenker-Olshinka K, et al. Do oral ovulation induction agents offer benefits in women 38 to 43 years of age undergoing insemination cycles? Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2021. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2021.01.012.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Van Der Westerlaken LA, Naaktgeboren N, Helmerhorst FM. Evaluation of pregnancy rates after intrauterine insemination according to indication, age, and sperm parameters. J Assist Reprod Genet. 1998. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1022576831691.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  30. Wiser A, Shalom-Paz E, Reinblatt SL, Son WY, Das M, Tulandi T, et al. Ovarian stimulation and intrauterine insemination in women aged 40 years or more. Reprod Biomed Online. 2012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2011.11.007.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Dickey RP, Taylor SN, Lu PY, Sartor BM, Rye PH, Pyrzak R. Effect of diagnosis, age, sperm quality, and number of preovulatory follicles on the outcome of multiple cycles of clomiphene citrate-intrauterine insemination. Fertil Steril. 2002. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0015-0282(02)04212-7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Brzechffa PR, Buyalos RP. Female and male partner age and menotrophin requirements influence pregnancy rates with human menopausal gonadotrophin therapy in combination with intrauterine insemination. Hum Reprod. 1997. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/12.1.29.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  33. Harris ID, Missmer SA, Hornstein MD. Poor success of gonadotropin-induced controlled ovarian hyperstimulation and intrauterine insemination for older women. Fertil Steril. 2010. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.02.040.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Soares SR, Cruz M, Vergara V, Requena A, García-Velasco JA. Donor IUI is equally effective for heterosexual couples, single women and lesbians, but autologous IUI does worse. Hum Reprod. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dez179.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Merviel P, Heraud MH, Grenier N, Lourdel E, Sanguinet P, Copin H. Predictive factors for pregnancy after intrauterine insemination (IUI): an analysis of 1038 cycles and a review of the literature. Fertil Steril. 2010. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.09.058.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Sahakyan M, Harlow BL, Hornstein MD. Influence of age, diagnosis, and cycle number on pregnancy rates with gonadotropin-induced controlled ovarian hyperstimulation and intrauterine insemination. Fertil Steril. 1999. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0015-0282(99)00300-3.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Schorsch M, Gomez R, Hahn T, Hoelscher-Obermaier J, Seufert R, Skala C. Success rate of inseminations dependent on maternal age? An analysis of 4246 insemination cycles. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd. 2013. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0033-1350615.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  38. Bedaiwy MA, Shokry M, Mousa N, Claessens A, Esfandiari N, Gotleib L, et al. Letrozole co-treatment in infertile women 40 years old and older receiving controlled ovarian stimulation and intrauterine insemination. Fertil Steril. 2009. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.03.020.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Ibérico G, Vioque J, Ariza N, Lozano JM, Roca M, Llácer J, et al. Analysis of factors influencing pregnancy rates in homologous intrauterine insemination. Fertil Steril. 2004. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2003.09.062.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Michau A, El Hachem H, Galey J, Le Parco S, Perdigao S, Guthauser B, et al. Predictive factors for pregnancy after controlled ovarian stimulation and intrauterine insemination: a retrospective analysis of 4146 cycles. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod. 2019. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jogoh.2019.05.006.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Bou Nemer L, Weitzman VN, Arheart KL, Barrionuevo MJ, Christie DR, Mouhayar Y, et al. In vitro fertilization versus mild stimulation intrauterine insemination in women aged 40 and older. Reprod Sci. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1177/1933719116667215.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Hull MGR, Eddowes HA, Fahy U, Abuzeid MI, Mills MS, Cahill DJ, et al. Expectations of assisted conception for infertility. Br Med J. 1996. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.304.6840.1465.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Nuojua-Huttunen S, Tomas C, Bloigu R, Tuomivaara L, Martikainen H. Intrauterine insemination treatment in subfertility: an analysis of factors affecting outcome. Hum Reprod. 1999. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/14.3.698.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Osaikhuwuomwan J, Osemwenkha A, Iribhogbe O, Aziken M, Orhue A. The effect of female age on the outcome of intrauterine insemination treatment in a public hospital-assisted reproduction technology unit. Niger J Clin Pract. 2018. https://doi.org/10.4103/njcp.njcp_248_16.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Houmard BS, Juang MP, Soules MR, Fujimoto VY. Factors influencing pregnancy rates with a combined clomiphene citrate/gonadotropin protocol for non-assisted reproductive technology fertility treatment. Fertil Steril. 2002. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0015-0282(01)02990-9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Malchau SS, Henningsen AA, Loft A, Rasmussen S, Forman J, Nyboe Anderson A, Pinborg A. The long-term prognosis for live birth in couples initiating fertility treatments. Hum Reprod. 2017. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dex096.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Frederick JL, Denker A, Rojas A, Horta I, Stone SC, Asch RH, et al. Is there a role for ovarian stimulation and intra-uterine insemination after age 40? Hum Reprod. 1994. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a138438.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  48. Vichinsartvichai P, Siriphadung S, Traipak K, Promrungrueng P, Manolertthewan C, Ratchanon S. The influence of women age and successfulness of intrauterine insemination (IUI) cycles. J Med Assoc Thai. 2015;98:833–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Linara-Demakakou E, Bodri D, Wang J, Arian-Schad M, Macklon N, Ahuja K. Cumulative live birth rates following insemination with donor spermatozoa in single women, same-sex couples and heterosexual patients. Reprod Biomed Online. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2020.08.010.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. De Brucker M, Camus M, Haentjens P, Verheyen G, Collins J, Tournaye H. Assisted reproduction using donor spermatozoa in women aged 40 and above: the high road or the low road? Reprod Biomed Online. 2013. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2013.02.008.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  51. Kang BM, Wu TC. Effect of age on intrauterine insemination with frozen donor sperm. Obstet Gynecol. 1996. https://doi.org/10.1016/0029-7844(96)00074-9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Auyeung A, Klein ME, Ratts VS, Odem RR, Williams DB. Fertility treatment in the forty and older woman. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2001. https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1013159116180.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  53. Buyalos RP, Daneshmand S, Peter MD, Brzechffa R. Basal estradiol and follicle-stimulating hormone predict fecundity in women of advanced reproductive age undergoing ovulation induction therapy. Fertil Steril. 1997. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0015-0282(97)81514-2.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  54. Corsan G, Trias A, Trout S, Kemmann E. Ovulation induction combined with intrauterine insemination in women 40 years of age and older: is it worthwhile? Hum Reprod. 1996. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a019306.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Andersen AN, Gianaroli L, Felberbaum R, de Mouzon J, Nyren KG. Assisted reproductive technology in Europe, 2002. Results generated from European registers by ESHRE. Hum Reprod. 2006;https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/del075.

  56. Belloc S, Cohen-Bacrie P, Benkhalifa M, Cohen-Barcie M, De Mouzon J, Hazout A, et al. Effect of maternal and paternal age on pregnancy and miscarriage rates after intrauterine insemination. Reprod Biomed Online. 2008. https://doi.org/10.1016/s1472-6483(10)60223-4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Bonow MP, Donne RDD, da Rosa VB, Lucca JA, Hillesheim CM, Schuffner A. Intrauterine insemination as a primary viable option to infertile couples: evaluation of patients in a private center. J Bras Reprod Assist. 2019. https://doi.org/10.5935/1518-0557.20190014.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  58. Campana A, Sakkas D, Stalberg A, Bianchi PG, Comte I, Pache T, et al. Intrauterine insemination: evaluation of the results according to the woman’s age, sperm quality, total sperm count per insemination and life table analysis. Hum Reprod. 1996. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a019244.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Plosker SM, Jacobson W, Amato P. Predicting and optimizing success in an intra-uterine insemination programme. Hum Reprod. 1994. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a138385.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Stone BA, Vargyas JM, Ringler GE, Stein AL, Marrs RP. Determinants of the outcome of intrauterine insemination: analysis of outcomes of 9963 consecutive cycles. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1999. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9378(99)70048-7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Tay PYS, Mohan Raj VR, Kulenthran A, Sitizawiah O. Prognostic factors influencing pregnancy rate after stimulated intrauterine insemination. Med J Malaysia. 2007;62:286–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Ashrafi M, Rashidi M, Ghasemi A, Arabipoor A, Daghighi S, Pourasghari P, et al. The role of infertility etiology in success rate of intrauterine insemination cycles: an evaluation of predictive factors for pregnancy rate. Int J Fertil Steril. 2013;7:100–7.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  63. Khalil RM, Rasmussen PE, Erb K, Laursen SB, Rex S, Westergaard LG. Homologous intrauterine insemination. An evaluation of prognostic factors based on a review of 2473 cycles. Acta Obs Gynecol Scand. 2001. https://doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0412.2001.800115.x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  64. Goldman MB, Thornton KL, Ryley D, Alper MM, Fung JL, Hornstein MD, et al. A randomized clinical trial to determine optimal infertility treatment in older couples: the Forty and Over Treatment Trial (FORT-T). Fertil Steril. 2014. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.03.012.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  65. Reindollar RH, Regan MM, Neumann PJ, Levine B, Thornton KL, Alper MM, et al. A randomized clinical trial to evaluate optimal treatment for unexplained infertility: the fast track and standard treatment (FASTT) trial. Fertil Steril. 2010. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.04.022.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. Goverde AJ, McDonnell J, Vermeiden JP, Schats R, Rutten FF, Schoemaker J. Intrauterine insemination or in-vitro fertilisation in idiopathic subfertility and male subfertility: a randomised trial and cost-effectiveness analysis. Lancet. 2000. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(99)04002-7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Morshedi M, Duran HE, Taylor S, Oehninger S. Efficacy and pregnancy outcome of two methods of semen preparation for intrauterine insemination: a prospective randomized study. Fertil Steril. 2003. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0015-0282(03)00250-4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Soria M, Pradillo G, Garcia J, Ramón P, Castillo A, Jordana C, Paricio P. Pregnancy predictors after intrauterine insemination: analysis of 3012 cycles in 1201 couples. J Reprod Infertil. 2012;13:158–66.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Sciences, University of Vermont Medical Center, 111 Colchester Ave, Burlington, VT, 05401, USA

    Carleigh B. Nesbit, Misty Blanchette-Porter & Navid Esfandiari

  2. The Robert Larner College of Medicine at the University of Vermont, Burlington, VT, 05405, USA

    Carleigh B. Nesbit, Misty Blanchette-Porter & Navid Esfandiari

Authors
  1. Carleigh B. Nesbit
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Misty Blanchette-Porter
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Navid Esfandiari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Navid Esfandiari.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Nesbit, C.B., Blanchette-Porter, M. & Esfandiari, N. Ovulation induction and intrauterine insemination in women of advanced reproductive age: a systematic review of the literature. J Assist Reprod Genet 39, 1445–1491 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-022-02551-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-022-02551-8

Keywords

Search

Navigation