Quality of cervical mucus and Huhner's test

Illustrations of the Value of the Microscope in the Treatment of the Sterile Condition

Sims JM, 1868·Br Med J

A randomized trial of web-based fertility-tracking software and fecundability

Wise LA et al., 2023·Fertil Steril

To assess the effect of randomization to FertilityFriend.com, a mobile computing fertility-tracking app, on fecundability. Parallel non-blinded randomized controlled trial nested within the Pregnancy Study Online (PRESTO), a North American preconception cohort. PATIENT(S): Female participants aged 21 to 45 years attempting conception for ≤6 menstrual cycles at enrolment (2013-2019). Randomization (1:1) of 5532 participants to receive a premium Fertility Friend (FF) subscription. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Fecundability (per-cycle probability of conception). Participants completed bimonthly follow-up questionnaires until pregnancy or a censoring event, whichever came first. We first performed an intent-to-treat analysis of the effect of FF randomization on fecundability. In secondary analyses, we used a per-protocol approach that accounted for adherence in each trial arm. In both analyses, we used proportional probabilities regression models to estimate fecundability ratios (FR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) comparing those randomized vs. not randomized and applied inverse probability weights to account for loss-to-follow-up (intent-to-treat and per-protocol analyses) and adherence (per-protocol analyses only). Using life-table methods, 64% of the 2775 participants randomized to FF and 63% of the 2767 participants not randomized to FF conceived during 12 cycles; these respective percentages were each 70% among those with 0-1 cycles of attempt time at enrolment. Of those randomized to FF, 72% were defined as adherent (68% of observed menstrual cycles). In intent-to-treat analyses, there was no appreciable association overall (FR = 0.97; 95% CI, 0.90-1.04) or within strata of pregnancy attempt time at enrolment, age, education, or other characteristics. In per-protocol analyses, we observed little association overall (FR = 1.06; 95% CI, 0.99-1.14), but weak-to-moderate positive associations among participants who had longer attempt times at enrolment (FR = 1.15; 95% CI, 0.98-1.35 for 3-4 cycles; FR = 1.14; 95% CI, 0.87-1.48 for 5-6 cycles), were aged <25 years (FR = 1.29; 95% CI, 1.01-1.66), had ≤12 years of education (FR = 1.32; 95% CI, 0.92-1.89), or were non-users of hormonal contraception within 3 months before enrolment (FR = 1.10; 95% CI, 1.02-1.19). No appreciable associations were observed in intent-to-treat analyses. In secondary per-protocol analyses that accounted for adherence, randomization to FF was associated with slightly greater fecundability among selected subgroups of participants; however, these results are susceptible to unmeasured confounding.

A Comparison of Two Hormonal Fertility Monitoring Systems for Ovulation Detection: A Pilot Study

Mu Q et al., 2023·Medicina (Kaunas)

Accuracy in detecting ovulation and estimating the fertile window in the menstrual cycle is essential for women to avoid or achieve pregnancy. There has been a rapid growth in fertility apps and home ovulation testing kits in recent years. Nevertheless, there lacks information on how well these apps perform in helping users understand their fertility in the menstrual cycle. This pilot study aimed to evaluate and compare the beginning, peak, and length of the fertile window as determined by a new luteinizing hormone (LH) fertility tracking app with the Clearblue Fertility Monitor (CBFM). A total of 30 women were randomized into either a quantitative Premom or a qualitative Easy@Home (EAH) LH testing system. The results of the two testing systems were compared with the results from the CBFM over three menstrual cycles of use. Potential LH levels for estimating the beginning of the fertile window were calculated along with user acceptability and satisfaction. The estimates of peak fertility by the Premom and EAH LH testing were highly correlated with the CBFM peak results (R = 0.99, p < 0.001). The participants had higher satisfaction and ease-of-use ratings with the CBFM compared to the Premom and EAH LH testing systems. LH 95% confidence levels for estimating the beginning of the fertile window were provided for both the Premom and EAH LH testing results. Our pilot study findings suggest that the Premom and EAH LH fertility testing app can accurately detect impending ovulation for women and are easy to use at home. However, successful utilization of these low-cost LH testing tools and apps for fertility self-monitoring and family planning needs further evaluation with a large and more diverse population.

Chronic Endometritis in Infertile Women: Impact of Untreated Disease, Plasma Cell Count and Antibiotic Therapy on IVF Outcome-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Vitagliano A et al., 2022·Diagnostics (Basel)

This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to evaluate the impact of chronic endometritis (CE) and its therapy on in vitro fertilization (IVF) outcome. Additionally, we aim to investigate whether various degrees of CE severity may exert a different effect on IVF outcome. Ongoing-pregnancy rate/live-birth-rate (OPR/LBR), clinical-pregnancy rate (CPR), and miscarriage rate (MR) were calculated. A total number of 4145 patients (from ten studies) were included. Women with CE had lower OPR/LBR (OR 1.97, p = 0.02) and CPR (OR 2.28, p = 0.002) compared to those without CE. CE cure increased OPR/LBR (OR 5.33, p < 0.0001) and CPR (OR 3.64, p = 0.0001). IVF outcome was comparable between women with cured CE and those without CE (OPR/LBR, p = ns). Women with severe CE had lower OPR/LBR (OR 0.43, p = 0.003) and CPR (OR 0.40, p = 0.0007) compared to those mild CE. Mild CE showed no influence on the IVF outcome as compared to women without CE (OPR/LBR, p = ns). Based on this data analysis, CE significantly reduces OPR/LBR and CPR in women undergoing IVF. Importantly, CE resolution after antibiotic therapy may improves IVF outcome, leading to similar OPR/LBR and CPR as compared to unaffected patients. The negative effects of CE on IVF outcome may be restricted to severe disease, whereas mild CE may have no influence on IVF success.