Intrauterine Insemination

  • Gautam N. Allahbadia
  • Rubina Merchant
  • Akanksha Allahbadia
  • Goral Gandhi
  • Swati Allahbadia


Intrauterine insemination (IUI) is an assisted reproductive technique that involves the deposition of a processed semen sample in the uterine cavity, overcoming natural barriers to sperm ascent in the female reproductive tract. It is a cost-effective, noninvasive first-line therapy for selected patients with functionally normal tubes and infertility due to a cervical factor, anovulation, moderate male factor, unexplained factors, immunological factors, and ejaculatory disorders with clinical pregnancy rates per cycle ranging from 10% to 20%. It, however, has limited use in patients with endometriosis, severe male factor infertility, tubal factor infertility, and advanced maternal age ≥ 35 years. IUI may be performed with or without ovarian stimulation. Controlled ovarian stimulation (COH), particularly with low-dose gonadotropins, with IUI offers significant benefit in terms of pregnancy outcomes compared with natural cycle or timed intercourse while reducing associated COH complications such as multiple pregnancies and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). Important prognostic indicators of success with IUI include patient’s age, duration of infertility, stimulation protocol, infertility etiology, number of cycles, timing of insemination, number of preovulatory follicles on the day of hCG administration, processed total motile sperm >ten million, and insemination count >1 × 106 with >4% normal spermatozoa. Alternative insemination techniques, such as fallopian tube sperm perfusion, intracervical insemination, and intratubal insemination, provide no additional benefit compared to IUI. A complete couple workup that includes patient history, physical examination, and clinical and laboratory investigations is mandatory to justify the choice in favor of IUI and guide alternative patient management, while individualizing the treatment protocol according to the patient characteristics with a strict cancellation policy to limit multifollicular development may help optimize IUI pregnancy outcomes.


Intrauterine insemination Assisted reproduction Ovarian stimulation in intrauterine insemination Fallopian tube sperm perfusion Intracervical insemination Cervical factor infertility 


  1. 1.
    De Sutter P. Rational diagnosis and treatment in infertility. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2006;20(5):647–64.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Abdelkader AM, Yeh J. The potential use of intrauterine insemination as a basic option for infertility: a review for technology-limited medical settings. Obstet Gynecol Int. 2009;2009:584837.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Katzorke T, Kolodziej FB. [Significance of insemination in the era of IVF and ICSI] (Article in German). Urologe A. 2010;49:842–6.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Steures P, van der Steeg JW, Verhoeve HR, van Dop PA, Hompes PG, Bossuyt PM, van der Veen F, Habbema JD, Eijkemans MJ, Mol BW. Does ovarian hyperstimulation in intrauterine insemination for cervical factor subfertility improve pregnancy rates? Hum Reprod. 2004;19(10):2263–6.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Steures P, van der Steeg JW, Hompes PG, Bossuyt PM, Habbema JD, Eijkemans MJ, Schöls WA, Burggraaff JM, van der Veen F, Mol BW, CECERM (Collaborative Effort for Clinical Evaluation in Reproductive Medicine). Effectiveness of intrauterine insemination in subfertile couples with an isolated cervical factor: a randomized clinical trial. Fertil Steril. 2007;88(6):1692–6.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Check JH, Bollendorf A, Zaccardo M, Lurie D, Vetter B. Intrauterine insemination for cervical and male factor without superovulation. Arch Androl. 1995;35(2):135–41.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ombelet W, Deblaere K, Bosmans E, Cox A, Jacobs P, Janssen M, Nijs M. Semen quality and intrauterine insemination. Reprod Biomed Online. 2003;7(4):485–92.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Aboulghar M, Baird DT, Collins J, Evers JL, Fauser BC, Lambalk CB, Somigliana E, Sunde A, Crosignani PG, Devroey P, Diczfalusy E, Diedrich K, Fraser L, Geraedts JP, Gianaroli L, Glasier A, Van Steirteghem A, Collins J, Crosignani PG, ESHRE Capri Workshop Group. Intrauterine insemination Hum Reprod Update 2009; 15(3):265–277.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    ESHRE Capri Workshop Group, Aboulghar M, Baird DT, Collins J, Evers JL, Fauser BC, Lambalk CB, Somigliana E, Sunde A, Crosignani PG, Devroey P, Diczfalusy E, Diedrich K, Fraser L, Geraedts JP, Gianaroli L, Glasier A, Van Steirteghem A, Collins J, Crosignani PG. Intrauterine insemination. Hum Reprod Update. 2009;15(3):265–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pashayan N, Lyratzopoulos G, Mathur R. Cost-effectiveness of primary offer of IVF vs. primary offer of IUI followed by IVF (for IUI failures) in couples with unexplained or mild male factor subfertility. BMC Health Serv Res. 2006;6:80.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Homburg R. The case for initial treatment with intrauterine insemination as opposed to in vitro fertilization for idiopathic infertility. Hum Fertil (Camb). 2003;6(3):122–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    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;355(9197):13–8.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Farhi J, Ben-Haroush A, Lande Y, Fisch B. Role of treatment with ovarian stimulation and intrauterine insemination in women with unilateral tubal occlusion diagnosed by hysterosalpingography. Fertil Steril. 2007;88(2):396–400.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ozkan S, Murk W, Arici A. Endometriosis and infertility: epidemiology and evidence-based treatments. Ann N Y Acad Sci. 2008;1127:92–100.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ozkan S, Arici A. Advances in treatment options of endometriosis. Gynecol Obstet Investig. 2009;67(2):81–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Werbrouck E, Spiessens C, Meuleman C, D’Hooghe T. No difference in cycle pregnancy rate and in cumulative live-birth rate between women with surgically treated minimal to mild endometriosis and women with unexplained infertility after controlled ovarian hyperstimulation and intrauterine insemination. Fertil Steril. 2006;86(3):566–71.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kissler S, Hamscho N, Zangos S, Gätje R, Müller A, Rody A, Döbert N, Menzel C, Grünwald F, Siebzehnrübl E, Kaufmann M. Diminished pregnancy rates in endometriosis due to impaired uterotubal transport assessed by hysterosalpingoscintigraphy. BJOG. 2005;112(10):1391–6.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hansen KA, Eyster KM. A review of current management of endometriosis in 2006: an evidence-based approach. S D Med. 2006;59(4):153–9.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dmowski WP, Pry M, Ding J, Rana N. Cycle-specific and cumulative fecundity in patients with endometriosis who are undergoing controlled ovarian hyperstimulation-intrauterine insemination or in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer. Fertil Steril. 2002;78(4):750–6.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Shibahara H, Koriyama J, Shiraishi Y, Hirano Y, Suzuki M, Koyama K. Diagnosis and treatment of immunologically infertile women with sperm-immobilizing antibodies in their sera. J Reprod Immunol. 2009;83(1–2):139–44.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Chang MY, Chiang CH, Chiu TH, Hsieh TT, Soong YK. The antral follicle count predicts the outcome of pregnancy in a controlled ovarian hyperstimulation/intrauterine insemination program. J Assist Reprod Genet. 1998;15(1):12–7.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Massin N, Cédrin-Durnerin I, Hugues JN. [Intrauterine insemination: spontaneous or medically-assisted ovulation?] (Article in French). Gynecol Obstet Fertil. 2004;32(10):898–903.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Pittrof RU, Shaker A, Dean N, Bekir JS, Campbell S, Tan SL. Success of intrauterine insemination using cryopreserved donor sperm is related to the age of the woman and the number of preovulatory follicles. J Assist Reprod Genet. 1996;13(4):310–4.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Verhulst SM, Cohlen BJ, Hughes E, Te Velde E, Heineman MJ. Intra-uterine insemination for unexplained subfertility. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006;(4):CD001838.Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Mahani IM, Afnan M. The pregnancy rates with intrauterine insemination (IUI) in superovulated cycles employing different protocols (clomiphene citrate (CC), human menopausal gonadotropin (HMG) and HMG + CC) and in natural ovulatory cycle. J Pak Med Assoc. 2004;54(10):503–5.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Chen L, Liu Q. [Natural cycle versus ovulation induction cycle in intrauterine insemination] (Article in Chinese). Zhonghua Nan Ke Xue. 2009;15(12):1112–5.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Custers IM, Steures P, Hompes P, Flierman P, van Kasteren Y, van Dop PA, van der Veen F, Mol BW. Intrauterine insemination: how many cycles should we perform? Hum Reprod. 2008;23(4):885–8.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Shekarriz M, DeWire DM, Thomas AJ Jr, Agarwal A. A method of human semen centrifugation to minimize the iatrogenic sperm injuries caused by reactive oxygen species. Eur Urol. 1995;28(1):31–5.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Cohlen BJ, Vandekerckhove P, te Velde ER, Habbema JD. Timed intercourse versus intra-uterine insemination with or without ovarian hyperstimulation for subfertility in men. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2000;(2):CD000360.Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Cantineau AE, Cohlen BJ, Al-Inany H, Heineman MJ. Intrauterine insemination versus fallopian tube sperm perfusion for non tubal infertility. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2004;(3):CD001502.Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    Krzysztof L. Optimizing stimulation protocols. In: Allahbadia GN, Merchant R, editors. Contemporary perspectives in assisted reproductive technology. India: Reed Elsevier; 2005. p. 10–7.Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    Dankert T, Kremer JA, Cohlen BJ, Hamilton CJ, Pasker-de Jong PC, Straatman H, van Dop PA. A randomized clinical trial of clomiphene citrate versus low dose recombinant FSH for ovarian hyperstimulation in intrauterine insemination cycles for unexplained and male subfertility. Hum Reprod. 2007;22(3):792–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Cantineau AE, Cohlen BJ, Heineman MJ. Ovarian stimulation protocols (anti-oestrogens, gonadotrophins with and without GnRH agonists/antagonists) for intrauterine insemination (IUI) in women with subfertility. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;(2):CD005356.Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Hughes EG, Collins JA, Gunby J. A randomized controlled trial of three low-dose gonadotrophin protocols for unexplained infertility. Hum Reprod. 1998;13(6):1527–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Kocak M, Dilbaz B, Demır B, Taşci Y, Tarcan A, Dede S, Haberal A. Lyophilised hMG versus rFSH in women with unexplained infertility undergoing a controlled ovarian stimulation with intrauterine insemination: a prospective, randomised study. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2010;26:429–34.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Kabli N, Sylvestre C, Tulandi T, Buckett W. Comparison of daily and alternate day recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone stimulation protocols for intrauterine insemination. Fertil Steril. 2009;91(4):1141–4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Wang CW, Horng SG, Chen CK, Wang HS, Huang HY, Lee CL, Soong YK. Ovulation induction with tamoxifen and alternate-day gonadotrophin in patients with thin endometrium. Reprod Biomed Online. 2008;17(1):20–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Barroso G, Menocal G, Felix H, Rojas-Ruiz JC, Arslan M, Oehninger S. Comparison of the efficacy of the aromatase inhibitor letrozole and clomiphene citrate as adjuvants to recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone in controlled ovarian hyperstimulation: a prospective, randomized, blinded clinical trial. Fertil Steril. 2006;86(5):1428–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Bedaiwy MA, Shokry M, Mousa N, Claessens A, Esfandiari N, Gotleib L, Casper R. Letrozole co-treatment in infertile women 40 years old and older receiving controlled ovarian stimulation and intrauterine insemination. Fertil Steril. 2009;91(6):2501–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Tehrani Nejad ES, Abediasl Z, Rashidi BH, Azimi Nekoo E, Shariat M, Amirchaghmaghi E. Comparison of the efficacy of the aromatase inhibitor letrozole and clomiphene citrate gonadotropins in controlled ovarian hyperstimulation: a prospective, simply randomized, clinical trial. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2008;25(5):187–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Baysoy A, Serdaroglu H, Jamal H, Karatekeli E, Ozornek H, Attar E. Letrozole versus human menopausal gonadotrophin in women undergoing intrauterine insemination. Reprod Biomed Online. 2006;13(2):208–12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Bedaiwy MA, Forman R, Mousa NA, Al Inany HG, Casper RF. Cost-effectiveness of aromatase inhibitor co-treatment for controlled ovarian stimulation. Hum Reprod. 2006;21(11):2838–44.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Mitwally MF, Casper RF. Aromatase inhibition reduces the dose of gonadotropin required for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation. J Soc Gynecol Investig. 2004;11(6):406–15.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Ryan GL, Moss V, Davis WA, Sparks AE, Dokras A, Van Voorhis BJ. Oral ovulation induction agents combined with low-dose gonadotropin injections and intrauterine insemination: cost- and clinical effectiveness. J Reprod Med. 2005;50(12):943–50.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Gregoriou O, Vlahos NF, Konidaris S, Papadias K, Botsis D, Creatsas GK. Randomized controlled trial comparing superovulation with letrozole versus recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone combined with intrauterine insemination for couples with unexplained infertility who had failed clomiphene citrate stimulation and intrauterine insemination. Fertil Steril. 2008;90(3):678–83.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Abdel Razik M, El-Berry S, El-Nezamy A, Saad A, Abdel Wahab A. Nitric oxide donors increase the pregnancy rate in patients with unexplained infertility undergoing clomiphene citrate stimulation and intrauterine insemination: a randomized controlled pilot study. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2017;33(3):199–202. Epub 2016 Nov 4.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Sengoku K, Tamate K, Takaoka Y, Horikawa M, Goishi K, Komori H, Okada R, Tsuchiya K, Ishikawa M. The clinical efficacy of low-dose step-up follicle stimulating hormone administration for treatment of unexplained infertility. Hum Reprod. 1999;14(2):349–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Ponzano A, Colangelo EC, Di Biase L, Romani F, Tiboni GM. Clinical experience with an ovarian stimulation protocol for intrauterine insemination adopting a gonadotropin releasing hormone antagonist at low dose. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2017;33(3):208–11. Epub 2016 Dec 6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Gobernado J, Alvarez-Colomo C, Rodriguez-Tabernero L, Barrero L, Fernández-Gómez JM, Schneider J. GnRH antagonist administration to postpone a weekend intrauterine insemination: a large cohort study from a public center. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2016 Sep 2;14(1):53. Scholar
  50. 50.
    Ragni G, Alagna F, Brigante C, Riccaboni A, Colombo M, Somigliana E, Crosignani PG. GnRH antagonists and mild ovarian stimulation for intrauterine insemination: a randomized study comparing different gonadotrophin dosages. Hum Reprod. 2004;19(1):54–8.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Lambalk CB, Leader A, Olivennes F, Fluker MR, Andersen AN, Ingerslev J, Khalaf Y, Avril C, Belaisch-Allart J, Roulier R, Mannaerts B. Treatment with the GnRH antagonist ganirelix prevents premature LH rises and luteinization in stimulated intrauterine insemination: results of a double-blind, placebo-controlled, multicentre trial. Hum Reprod. 2006;21(3):632–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Lin YH, Seow KM, Chen HJ, Hsieh BC, Huang LW, Tzeng CR, Hwang JL. Effect of cetrorelix dose on premature LH surge during ovarian stimulation. Reprod Biomed Online. 2008;16(6):772–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Crosignani PG, Somigliana E, Intrauterine Insemination Study Group. Effect of GnRH antagonists in FSH mildly stimulated intrauterine insemination cycles: a multicentre randomized trial. Hum Reprod. 2007;22(2):500–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Kutlu T, Özkaya E, Şanverdi İ, Devranoğlu B, İpekçi C, Konukçu B, Şahin Y, Karateke A. The relationship between estradiol-progesterone alterations after ovulation trigger and treatment success in intrauterine insemination cycles. Turk J Obstet Gynecol. 2016;13(2):56–61. Epub 2016 Jun 15.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Steures P, van der Steeg JW, Hompes PG, Bossuyt PM, van der Veen F, Habbema JD, Eijkemans MJ, Broekmans FJ, Verhoeve HR, Mol BW. [Intra-uterine insemination with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation compared to an expectant management in couples with unexplained subfertility and an intermediate prognosis: a randomised study] (Article in Dutch). Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 2008;152(27):1525–1531.Google Scholar
  56. 56.
    Bhattacharya S, Harrild K, Mollison J, Wordsworth S, Tay C, Harrold A, McQueen D, Lyall H, Johnston L, Burrage J, Grossett S, Walton H, Lynch J, Johnstone A, Kini S, Raja A, Templeton A. Clomifene citrate or unstimulated intrauterine insemination compared with expectant management for unexplained infertility: pragmatic randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2008;337:a716.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Yavas Y, Selub MR. Intrauterine insemination (IUI) pregnancy outcome is enhanced by shorter intervals from semen collection to sperm wash, from sperm wash to IUI time, and from semen collection to IUI time. Fertil Steril. 2004;82(6):1638–47.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Miller DC, Hollenbeck BK, Smith GD, Randolph JF, Christman GM, Smith YR, Lebovic DI, Ohl DA. Processed total motile sperm count correlates with pregnancy outcome after intrauterine insemination. Urology. 2002;60(3):497–501.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Branigan EF, Estes MA, Muller CH. Advanced semen analysis: a simple screening test to predict intrauterine insemination success. Fertil Steril. 1999;71(3):547–51.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Bedaiwy MA, Sharma RK, Alhussaini TK, Mohamed MS, Abdel-Aleem AM, Nelson DR, Thomas AJ Jr, Agarwal A. The use of novel semen quality scores to predict pregnancy in couples with male-factor infertility undergoing intrauterine insemination. J Androl. 2003;24(3):353–60.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Shibahara H, Obara H, Ayustawati HY, Suzuki T, Ohno A, Takamizawa S, Suzuki M. Prediction of pregnancy by intrauterine insemination using CASA estimates and strict criteria in patients with male factor infertility. Int J Androl. 2004;27(2):63–8.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. 62.
    Kably-Ambe A, Carballo-Mondragón E, Durán-Monterrosas L, Soriano-Ortega KP, Roque-Sánchez AM. Effect of sexual abstinence on pregnancy rates after an intrauterine insemination. Ginecol Obstet Mex. 2015;83(2):104–9.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  63. 63.
    Boyraz G, Selcuk I, Sokmensuer LK, Bozdag G, Menkveld R, Gunalp S. Evaluation of the relation between preapoptotic sperm rate in ejaculate and intrauterine insemination success rate in patients with unexplained infertility. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2016;36(8):980–3. Epub 2016 Sep 10.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  64. 64.
    Boomsma CM, Heineman MJ, Cohlen BJ, Farquhar C. Semen preparation techniques for intrauterine insemination. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;(4):CD004507.Google Scholar
  65. 65.
    Ohashi K, Saji F, Wakimoto A, Kato M, Tsutsui T, Tanizawa O. Preparation of oligozoospermic and/or asthenozoospermic semen for intrauterine insemination using the SpermPrep semen filtration column. Fertil Steril. 1992;57(4):866–70.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  66. 66.
    Paasch U, Grunewald S, Glander HJ. Sperm selection in assisted reproductive techniques. Soc Reprod Fertil Suppl. 2007;65:515–25.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  67. 67.
    Allamaneni SS, Agarwal A, Rama S, Ranganathan P, Sharma RK. Comparative study on density gradients and swim-up preparation techniques utilizing neat and cryopreserved spermatozoa. Asian J Androl. 2005;7(1):86–92.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  68. 68.
    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;79(Suppl 3):1625–32.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  69. 69.
    Ricci G, Perticarari S, Boscolo R, Montico M, Guaschino S, Presani G. Semen preparation methods and sperm apoptosis: swim-up versus gradient-density centrifugation technique. Fertil Steril. 2009;91(2):632–8.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  70. 70.
    Zhang Y, Qian Y, Feng T, Cai L, Liu J. [Separation of high-quality sperm by PureSperm centrifugation applied to intrauterine insemination cycles] (Article in Chinese). Zhonghua Nan Ke Xue. 2004;10(5):348–50.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  71. 71.
    Said TM, Agarwal A, Zborowski M, Grunewald S, Glander HJ, Paasch U. Utility of magnetic cell separation as a molecular sperm preparation technique. Andrology. 2008;29(2):134–42.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. 72.
    Lee TH, Liu CH, Shih YT, Tsao HM, Huang CC, Chen HH, Lee MS. Magnetic-activated cell sorting for sperm preparation reduces spermatozoa with apoptotic markers and improves the acrosome reaction in couples with unexplained infertility {dagger}. Hum Reprod. 2010;25(4):839–46.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  73. 73.
    Kosmas IP, Tatsioni A, Fatemi HM, Kolibianakis EM, Tournaye H, Devroey P. Human chorionic gonadotropin administration vs. luteinizing monitoring for intrauterine insemination timing, after administration of clomiphene citrate: a meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2007;87(3):607–12.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  74. 74.
    Lewis V, Queenan J Jr, Hoeger K, Stevens J, Guzick DS. Clomiphene citrate monitoring for intrauterine insemination timing: a randomized trial. Fertil Steril. 2006;85(2):401–6.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  75. 75.
    Mitwally MF, Abdel-Razeq S, Casper RF. Human chorionic gonadotropin administration is associated with high pregnancy rates during ovarian stimulation and timed intercourse or intrauterine insemination. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2004;2:55.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. 76.
    Kucuk T. Intrauterine insemination: is the timing correct? J Assist Reprod Genet. 2008;25(8):427–30.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. 77.
    Shalev E, Geslevich Y, Matilsky M, Ben-Ami M. Induction of pre-ovulatory gonadotrophin surge with gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist compared to pre-ovulatory injection of human chorionic gonadotrophins for ovulation induction in intrauterine insemination treatment cycles. Hum Reprod. 1995;10(9):2244–7.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  78. 78.
    Giugliano E, Caldarelli C, Giugliano B, Stellin G, Caserta D, Moscarini M, Marci R. The ultrasonographic detection of follicular rupture at the time of intrauterine insemination: is it really decisive? Gynecol Endocrinol. 2015;31(10):824–7. Epub 2015 Aug 18.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  79. 79.
    Liang JY, Li ZT, Yang XH, Huang ZC, Yang SF, Wang LH, Liu FH. Time interval from the end of sperm processing to artificial intrauterine in semination with husband's sperm correlates to the rate of clinical pregnancy. Zhonghua Nan Ke Xue. 2015 Jun;21(6):532–5.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  80. 80.
    Çok T, Çağlar Aytaç P, Şimşek E, Haydardedeoğlu B, Kalaycı H, Özdemir H, Bulgan Kılıçdağ E. The effect of preserving prepared sperm samples at room temperature or at 37 °C before intrauterine insemination (IUI) on clinical pregnancy rate. Turk J Obstet Gynecol. 2015;12(1):6–10. Epub 2015 Mar 15.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  81. 81.
    Custers IM, Flierman PA, Maas P, Cox T, Van Dessel TJ, Gerards MH, Mochtar MH, Janssen CA, van der Veen F, Mol BW. Immobilisation versus immediate mobilisation after intrauterine insemination: randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2009;339:b4080. Scholar
  82. 82.
    Polat I, Ekiz A, Yildirim G, Sahin O, Ulker V, Alkis I, Tekirdag AI. Ultrasound-guided intrauterine insemination versus blind intrauterine insemination: a randomized controlled trial. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol. 2015;42(5):657–62.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  83. 83.
    Erdem A, Erdem M, Atmaca S, Guler I. Impact of luteal phase support on pregnancy rates in intrauterine insemination cycles: a prospective randomized study. Fertil Steril. 2009;91(6):2508–13.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  84. 84.
    Pirard C, Donnez J, Loumaye E. GnRH agonist as novel luteal support: results of a randomized, parallel group, feasibility study using intranasal administration of buserelin. Hum Reprod. 2005;20(7):1798–804.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  85. 85.
    Randall GW, Gantt PA. Double vs. single intrauterine insemination per cycle: use in gonadotropin cycles and in diagnostic categories of ovulatory dysfunction and male factor infertility. J Reprod Med. 2008;53(3):196–202.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  86. 86.
    Ragni G, Maggioni P, Guermandi E, Testa A, Baroni E, Colombo M, Crosignani PG. Efficacy of double intrauterine insemination in controlled ovarian hyperstimulation cycles. Fertil Steril. 1999;72(4):619–22.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  87. 87.
    Polyzos NP, Tzioras S, Mauri D, Tatsioni A. Double versus single intrauterine insemination for unexplained infertility: a meta-analysis of randomized trials. Fertil Steril. 2009;94:1261–6.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  88. 88.
    Tonguc E, Var T, Onalan G, Altinbas S, Tokmak A, Karakaş N, Gulerman C. Comparison of the effectiveness of single versus double intrauterine insemination with three different timing regimens. Fertil Steril. 2010;94:1267–70.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  89. 89.
    Costello MF. Systematic review of the treatment of ovulatory infertility with clomiphene citrate and intrauterine insemination. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2004;44(2):93–102.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  90. 90.
    Bensdorp AJ, Cohlen BJ, Heineman MJ, Vandekerckhove P. Intra-uterine insemination for male subfertility. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;(4):CD000360.Google Scholar
  91. 91.
    Huang FJ, Chang SY, Chang JC, Kung FT, Wu JF, Tsai MY. Timed intercourse after intrauterine insemination for treatment of infertility. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 1998;80(2):257–61.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  92. 92.
    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;78(5):1088–95.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  93. 93.
    Aboulghar M, Mansour R, Serour G, Abdrazek A, Amin Y, Rhodes C. Controlled ovarian hyperstimulation and intrauterine insemination for treatment of unexplained infertility should be limited to a maximum of three trials. Fertil Steril. 2001;75(1):88–91.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  94. 94.
    Qublan H, Amarin Z, Nawasreh M, Diab F, Malkawi S, Al-Ahmad N, Balawneh M. Luteinized unruptured follicle syndrome: incidence and recurrence rate in infertile women with unexplained infertility undergoing intrauterine insemination. Hum Reprod. 2006;21(8):2110–3.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  95. 95.
    Hughes E, Brown J, Collins JJ, Vanderkerchove P. Clomiphene citrate for unexplained subfertility in women. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2010;(1):CD000057.Google Scholar
  96. 96.
    Lensen SF, Manders M, Nastri CO, Gibreel A, Martins WP, Templer GE, Farquhar C. Endometrial injury for pregnancy following sexual intercourse or intrauterine insemination. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016;(6):CD011424.
  97. 97.
    Besselink DE, Farquhar C, Kremer JA, Marjoribanks J, O’Brien P. Cervical insemination versus intra-uterine insemination of donor sperm for subfertility. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2008;(2):CD000317.Google Scholar
  98. 98.
    O’Brien P, Vandekerckhove P. Intra-uterine versus cervical insemination of donor sperm for subfertility. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2000;(2):CD000317.Google Scholar
  99. 99.
    Muharib NS, Abdel Gadir A, Shaw RW. Slow release intrauterine insemination versus the bolus technique in the treatment of women with cervical mucus hostility. Hum Reprod. 1992;7(2):227–9.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  100. 100.
    Marschalek J, Franz M, Gonen Y, Kruessel JS, Weichselbaum A, Kuessel L, Trofaier ML, Ott J. The effect of slow release insemination on pregnancy rates: report of two randomized controlled pilot studies and meta-analysis. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2017;295(4):1025–32. Epub 2017 Feb 14.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  101. 101.
    Cantineau AE, Cohlen BJ, Heineman MJ. Intra-uterine insemination versus fallopian tube sperm perfusion for non-tubal infertility. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009;(2):CD001502.Google Scholar
  102. 102.
    Fanchin R, Olivennes F, Righini C, Hazout A, Schwab B, Frydman R. A new system for fallopian tube sperm perfusion leads to pregnancy rates twice as high as standard intrauterine insemination. Fertil Steril. 1995;64(3):505–10.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  103. 103.
    Ricci G, Nucera G, Pozzobon C, Boscolo R, Giolo E, Guaschino S. A simple method for fallopian tube sperm perfusion using a blocking device in the treatment of unexplained infertility. Fertil Steril. 2001;76(6):1242–8.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  104. 104.
    Noci I, Dabizzi S, Evangelisti P, Cozzi C, Cameron Smith M, Criscuoli L, Fuzzi B, Branconi F. Evaluation of clinical efficacy of three different insemination techniques in couple infertility. A randomized study. Minerva Ginecol. 2007;59(1):11–8.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  105. 105.
    Mamas L. Comparison of fallopian tube sperm perfusion and intrauterine tuboperitoneal insemination: a prospective randomized study. Fertil Steril. 2006;85(3):735–40.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  106. 106.
    Aribarg A, Sukcharoen N. Intrauterine insemination of washed spermatozoa for treatment of oligozoospermia. Int J Androl. 1995;18(Suppl 1):62–6.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  107. 107.
    Billiet K, Dhont M, Vervaet C, Vermeire A, Gerris J, De Neubourg D, Delbeke L, Ombelet W, De Sutter P. A multi-center prospective, randomized, double-blind trial studying the effect of misoprostol on the outcome of intrauterine insemination. Gynecol Obstet Investig. 2008;66(3):145–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. 108.
    Zadehmodarres S, Oladi B, Saeedi S, Jahed F, Ashraf H. Intrauterine insemination with husband semen: an evaluation of pregnancy rate and factors affecting outcome. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2009;26(1):7–11.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  109. 109.
    Sacks PC, Simon JA. Infectious complications of intrauterine insemination: a case report and literature review. Int J Fertil. 1991;36(6):331–9.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  110. 110.
    Mårdh PA. Influence of infection with chlamydia trachomatis on pregnancy outcome, infant health and life-long sequelae in infected offspring. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2002;16(6):847–64.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  111. 111.
    Ahinko-Hakamaa K, Huhtala H, Tinkanen H. Success in intrauterine insemination: the role of etiology. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2007;86(7):855–60.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  112. 112.
    Tomlinson MJ, Amissah-Arthur JB, Thompson KA, Kasraie JL, Bentick B. Prognostic indicators for intrauterine insemination (IUI): statistical model for IUI success. Hum Reprod. 1996;11(9):1892–6.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  113. 113.
    van Rumste MM, Custers IM, van der Veen F, van Wely M, Evers JL, Mol BW. The influence of the number of follicles on pregnancy rates in intrauterine insemination with ovarian stimulation: a meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2008;14(6):563–70.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  114. 114.
    Dickey RP, Taylor SN, Lu PY, Sartor BM, Rye PH, Pyrzak R. Relationship of follicle numbers and estradiol levels to multiple implantation in 3,608 intrauterine insemination cycles. Fertil Steril. 2001;75(1):69–78.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  115. 115.
    Hale L. Prevention of multiple pregnancy during ovulation induction. Twin Res. 2003;6(6):540–2.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  116. 116.
    Bry-Gauillard H, Coulondre S, Cédrin-Durnerin I, Hugues JN. [Benefits and risks of ovarian stimulation before intrauterine insemination] (Article in French). Gynecol Obstet Fertil. 2000;28(11):820–31.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  117. 117.
    Ragni G, Caliari I, Nicolosi AE, Arnoldi M, Somigliana E, Crosignani PG. Preventing high-order multiple pregnancies during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation and intrauterine insemination: 3 years’ experience using low-dose recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone and gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonists. Fertil Steril. 2006;85(3):619–24.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  118. 118.
    Guven S, Gunalp GS, Tekin Y. Factors influencing pregnancy rates in intrauterine insemination cycles. J Reprod Med. 2008;53(4):257–65.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  119. 119.
    Montanaro Gauci M, Kruger TF, Coetzee K, Smith K, Van Der Merwe JP, Lombard CJ. Stepwise regression analysis to study male and female factors impacting on pregnancy rate in an intrauterine insemination programme. Andrologia. 2001;33(3):135–41.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  120. 120.
    Dickey RP, Olar TT, Taylor SN, Curole DN, Rye PH, Matulich EM. Relationship of follicle number, serum estradiol, and other factors to birth rate and multiparity in human menopausal gonadotropin-induced intrauterine insemination cycles. Fertil Steril. 1991;56(1):89–92.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  121. 121.
    Tay PY, Raj VR, Kulenthran A, Sitizawiah O. Prognostic factors influencing pregnancy rate after stimulated intrauterine insemination. Med J Malaysia. 2007;62(4):286–9.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  122. 122.
    Steures P, van der Steeg JW, Mol BW, Eijkemans MJ, van der Veen F, Habbema JD, Hompes PG, Bossuyt PM, Verhoeve HR, van Kasteren YM, van Dop PA, CECERM (Collaborative Effort in Clinical Evaluation in Reproductive Medicine). Prediction of an ongoing pregnancy after intrauterine insemination. Fertil Steril. 2004;82(1):45–51.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  123. 123.
    Yalti S, Gürbüz B, Sezer H, Celik S. Effects of semen characteristics on IUI combined with mild ovarian stimulation. Arch Androl. 2004;50(4):239–46.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  124. 124.
    Van Voorhis BJ, Barnett M, Sparks AE, Syrop CH, Rosenthal G, Dawson J. Effect of the total motile sperm count on the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of intrauterine insemination and in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 2001;75(4):661–8.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  125. 125.
    Bhal PS, Pugh ND, Gregory L, Goacher L, Wells C, Shaw RW. The potential effect of controlled ovarian hyperstimulation on follicular vascular perfusion: a study applying power Doppler ultrasonography within a treatment programme using donor sperm. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2001;21(5):507–12.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  126. 126.
    Marchetti C, Dewailly D. [Intrauterine insemination: indications and methods] (Article in French). Rev Prat. 2006;56(5):500–6.PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  127. 127.
    Ragni G, Anselmino M, Nicolosi AE, Brambilla ME, Calanna G, Somigliana E. Follicular vascularity is not predictive of pregnancy outcome in mild controlled ovarian stimulation and IUI cycles. Hum Reprod. 2007;22(1):210–4.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  128. 128.
    Check JH, Lurie D, Peymer M, Katsoff D, Long R. Efficacy of intrauterine insemination without ovarian hyperstimulation for male or cervical factor in women aged 40 or over. Arch Androl. 2000;44(3):193–6.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  129. 129.
    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. Suppl 4:4334:47.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  130. 130.
    Erdem M, Erdem A, Guler I, Atmaca S. Role of antral follicle count in controlled ovarian hyperstimulation and intrauterine insemination cycles in patients with unexplained subfertility. Fertil Steril. 2008;90(2):360–6.PubMedCrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  131. 131.
    Costello MF, Emerson S, Lukic J, Sjoblom P, Garrett D, Hughes G, Steigrad S. Predictive value of mid luteal progesterone concentration before luteal support in controlled ovarian hyperstimulation with intrauterine insemination. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2004;44(1):51–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  132. 132.
    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;93(1):79–88.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  133. 133.
    Chaabane S, Sheehy O, Monnier P, Fraser W, Bissonnette F, Trasler JM, Muanda FT, Boukhris T, Karam F, Santos F, Blais L, Bérard A. Ovarian stimulation, intrauterine insemination, multiple pregnancy and major congenital malformations: a systematic review and meta- analysis- the ART_Rev study. Curr Drug Saf. 2016;11(3):222–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  134. 134.
    Bakas P, Tzouma C, Creatsa M, Boutas I, Hassiakos D. Maternal hyperthyroidism after intrauterine insemination due to hypertrophic action of human chorionic gonadotropin: a case report. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol. 2016;43(3):446–7.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  135. 135.
    Leković D, Gotić M, Ljubić A. First successful pregnancy outcome after intrauterine insemination in a woman with primary infertility and essential thrombocythemia treated with interferon-alpha and aspirin. Srp Arh Celok Lek. 2015;143(3–4):210–3.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  136. 136.
    García-Herrero S, Meseguer M, Martínez-Conejero JA, Remohí J, Pellicer A, Garrido N. The transcriptome of spermatozoa used in homologous intrauterine insemination varies considerably between samples that achieve pregnancy and those that do not. Fertil Steril. 2009;94:1360–73.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  137. 137.
    Panchal S, Nagori CB. Pre-hCG 3D and 3D power Doppler assessment of the follicle for improving pregnancy rates in intrauterine insemination cycles. J Hum Reprod Sci. 2009;2(2):62–7.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  138. 138.
    Swierkowski-Blanchard N, Boitrelle F, Alter L, Selva J, Quibel T, Torre A. Uterine contractility and elastography as prognostic factors for pregnancy after intrauterine insemination. Fertil Steril. 2017;107(4):961–8.e3. Epub 2017 Mar 7.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  139. 139.
    Zarei A, Mahboubi M, Parsanezhad ME, Alborzi S, Younesi M, Madadi G. Effects of piroxicam administration on pregnancy outcome in intrauterine insemination (IUI) cycles: a randomized clinical trial. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol. 2016;43(2):225–9.PubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Gautam N. Allahbadia
    • 1
  • Rubina Merchant
    • 2
  • Akanksha Allahbadia
    • 2
  • Goral Gandhi
    • 1
  • Swati Allahbadia
    • 2
  1. 1.Indo Nippon IVFMumbaiIndia
  2. 2.A Rotunda – The Center for Human ReproductionMumbaiIndia

Personalised recommendations