Clinical Guidelines and Standards Guidelines by Clinical Area

Evidence-based guideline: unexplained infertility

Romualdi D, Ata B, Bhattacharya S, Bosch E, Costello M, Gersak K, Homburg R, Mincheva M, Norman RJ, Piltonen T, Dos Santos-Ribeiro S, Scicluna D, Somers S, Sunkara SK, Verhoeve HR, Le Clef N

Published October 3, 2023 Hum Reprod
DOI 10.1093/humrep/dead150 PMID 37599566 PMC PMC10546081

RRM Academy Synopsis

No unexplained infertility recommendation has high-quality evidence

None of the 40 recommendations backed by evidence in this guideline has high-quality support. Of those, 31 have very low-quality support. The guideline covers couples with unexplained infertility. An ESHRE expert group wrote it.

Key Findings

  • The guideline makes 52 recommendations on defining, diagnosing and treating unexplained infertility: 40 evidence-based, 10 good practice points and two research-only.
  • Among the 40 evidence-based recommendations, 29 are strong and 11 are weak.
  • Graded by evidence, no recommendation reaches high quality. One is moderate, nine are low and 31 are very low.
  • The group names IUI with ovarian stimulation as first-line treatment, a strong recommendation that rests on very low-quality evidence.
  • The group advises against sperm DNA fragmentation testing and most other extra male tests when a WHO-criteria semen analysis is normal.

Interpretation

This consensus guideline from a professional society rests on literature searches and expert agreement. The group says HSG and HyCoSy miss mild endometriosis, adhesions and subtle tubal lesions. Good-quality data are insufficient to show that clinically relevant diagnoses go missing when laparoscopy is skipped in women at low risk for tubal pathology. The group recommends against routine diagnostic laparoscopy and advises counseling women at high risk for tubal pathology or endometriosis about it. The authors note that the standard work-up gives the male partner a relatively minor role. The group calls for more research to strengthen these recommendations.

RRM Context

The guideline says the share of couples given this diagnosis depends on how much testing is done. Restorative reproductive medicine treats unexplained infertility as undiagnosed infertility. Evaluation comes before treatment. The first-line treatment here starts with no cause found. The guideline's text lists problems that standard imaging misses.

Abstract

Study Question

What is the recommended management for couples presenting with unexplained infertility (UI), based on the best available evidence in the literature?

Summary Answer

The evidence-based guideline on UI makes 52 recommendations on the definition, diagnosis, and treatment of UI.

What Is Known Already

UI is diagnosed in the absence of any abnormalities of the female and male reproductive systems after 'standard' investigations. However, a consensual standardization of the diagnostic work-up is still lacking. The management of UI is traditionally empirical. The efficacy, safety, costs, and risks of treatment options have not been subjected to robust evaluation.

Study Design, Size, Duration

The guideline was developed according to the structured methodology for ESHRE guidelines. Following formulation of key questions by a group of experts, literature searches, and assessments were undertaken. Papers written in English and published up to 24 October 2022 were evaluated.

Participants/Materials, Setting, Methods

Based on the available evidence, recommendations were formulated and discussed until consensus was reached within the guideline development group (GDG). Following stakeholder review of an initial draft, the final version was approved by the GDG and the ESHRE Executive Committee.

Main Results and the Role of Chance

This guideline aims to help clinicians provide the best care for couples with UI. As UI is a diagnosis of exclusion, the guideline outlined the basic diagnostic procedures that couples should/could undergo during an infertility work-up, and explored the need for additional tests. The first-line treatment for couples with UI was deemed to be IUI in combination with ovarian stimulation. The place of additional and alternative options for treatment of UI was also evaluated. The GDG made 52 recommendations on diagnosis and treatment for couples with UI. The GDG formulated 40 evidence-based recommendations-of which 29 were formulated as strong recommendations and 11 as weak-10 good practice points and two research only recommendations. Of the evidence-based recommendations, none were supported by high-quality evidence, one by moderate-quality evidence, nine by low-quality evidence, and 31 by very low-quality evidence. To support future research in UI, a list of research recommendations was provided.

Limitations, Reasons for Caution

Most additional diagnostic tests and interventions in couples with UI have not been subjected to robust evaluation. For a large proportion of these tests and treatments, evidence was very limited and of very low quality. More evidence is required, and the results of future studies may result in the current recommendations being revised.

Wider Implications of the Findings

The guideline provides clinicians with clear advice on best practice in the care of couples with UI, based on the best evidence currently available. In addition, a list of research recommendations is provided to stimulate further studies in the field. The full guideline and a patient leaflet are available in www.eshre.eu/guideline/UI.

Study Funding/Competing Interests

The guideline was developed by ESHRE, who funded the guideline meetings, literature searches, and dissemination of the guideline in collaboration with the Monash University led Australian NHMRC Centre of Research Excellence in Women's Health in Reproductive Life (CREWHIRL). The guideline group members did not receive any financial incentives; all work was provided voluntarily. D.R. reports honoraria from IBSA and Novo Nordisk. B.A. reports speakers' fees from Merck, Gedeon Richter, Organon and Intas Pharma; is part of the advisory board for Organon Turkey and president of the Turkish Society of Reproductive Medicine. S.B. reports speakers' fees from Merck, Organon, Ferring, the Ostetric and Gynaecological Society of Singapore and the Taiwanese Society for Reproductive Medicine; editor and contributing author, Reproductive Medicine for the MRCOG, Cambridge University Press; is part of the METAFOR and CAPE trials data monitoring committee. E.B. reports research grants from Roche diagnostics, Gedeon Richter and IBSA; speaker's fees from Merck, Ferring, MSD, Roche Diagnostics, Gedeon Richter, IBSA; E.B. is also a part of an Advisory Board of Ferring Pharmaceuticals, MSD, Roche Diagnostics, IBSA, Merck, Abbott and Gedeon Richter. M.M. reports consulting fees from Mojo Fertility Ltd. R.J.N. reports research grant from Australian National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC); consulting fees from Flinders Fertility Adelaide, VinMec Hospital Hanoi Vietnam; speaker's fees from Merck Australia, Cadilla Pharma India, Ferring Australia; chair clinical advisory committee Westmead Fertility and research institute MyDuc Hospital Vietnam. T.P. is a part of the Research Council of Finland and reports research grants from Roche Diagnostics, Novo Nordics and Sigrid Juselius foundation; consulting fees from Roche Diagnostics and organon; speaker's fees from Gedeon Richter, Roche, Exeltis, Organon, Ferring and Korento patient organization; is a part of NFOG, AE-PCOS society and several Finnish associations. S.S.R. reports research grants from Roche Diagnostics, Organon, Theramex; consulting fees from Ferring Pharmaceuticals, MSD and Organon; speaker's fees from Ferring Pharmaceuticals, MSD/Organon, Besins, Theramex, Gedeon Richter; travel support from Gedeon Richter; S.S.R. is part of the Data Safety Monitoring Board of TTRANSPORT and deputy of the ESHRE Special Interest Group on Safety and Quality in ART; stock or stock options from IVI Lisboa, Clínica de Reprodução assistida Lda; equipment/medical writing/gifts from Roche Diagnostics and Ferring Pharmaceuticals. S.K.S. reports speakers' fees from Merck, Ferring, MSD, Pharmasure. HRV reports consulting and travel fees from Ferring Pharmaceuticals. The other authors have nothing to disclose.

DISCLAIMER: This guideline represents the views of ESHRE, which were achieved after careful consideration of the scientific evidence available at the time of preparation. In the absence of scientific evidence on certain aspects, a consensus between the relevant ESHRE stakeholders has been obtained. Adherence to these clinical practice guidelines does not guarantee a successful or specific outcome, nor does it establish a standard of care. Clinical practice guidelines do not replace the need for application of clinical judgment to each individual presentation, nor variations based on locality and facility type. ESHRE makes no warranty, express or implied, regarding the clinical practice guidelines and specifically excludes any warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular use or purpose. (Full disclaimer available at www.eshre.eu/guidelines.).

Topics

By this author

Related research

Clinical Guidelines and Standards › Guidelines by Clinical Area › Fertility and Infertility Guidelines · Infertility › Evaluation › Unexplained Infertility · Assisted Reproduction › Procedures and Protocols › Intrauterine Insemination
Siladitya Bhattacharya, Robert J Norman, Terhi Piltonen, Harold R Verhoeve
S Bhattacharya, Bob Norman, Rob Norman, Bobby Norman, R Norman, T Piltonen, H Verhoeve
PMID 37599566 37599566 DOI 10.1093/humrep/dead150 10.1093/humrep/dead150 Romualdi et al. 2023, Romualdi 2023