Advertisement

The effect of adenomyosis types on clinical outcomes of IVF embryo transfer after ultra-long GnRH agonist protocol

  • Author Footnotes
    1 Contributed equally.
    Bing Han
    Footnotes
    1 Contributed equally.
    Affiliations
    Center for Reproductive Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Third Hospital Beijing 100000, China

    National Clinical Research Center for Obstetrics and Gynecology (Peking University Third Hospital) Beijing 100000, China

    Key Laboratory of Assisted Reproduction, Ministry of Education (Peking University) Beijing 100000, China

    Beijing Key Laboratory of Reproductive Endocrinology and Assisted Reproductive Technology Beijing 100000, China
    Search for articles by this author
  • Author Footnotes
    1 Contributed equally.
    Tingting Liang
    Footnotes
    1 Contributed equally.
    Affiliations
    Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Second Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan City 030000, China
    Search for articles by this author
  • Wen Zhang
    Affiliations
    Center for Reproductive Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Third Hospital Beijing 100000, China

    National Clinical Research Center for Obstetrics and Gynecology (Peking University Third Hospital) Beijing 100000, China

    Key Laboratory of Assisted Reproduction, Ministry of Education (Peking University) Beijing 100000, China

    Beijing Key Laboratory of Reproductive Endocrinology and Assisted Reproductive Technology Beijing 100000, China
    Search for articles by this author
  • Caihong Ma
    Correspondence
    Corresponding author.
    Affiliations
    Center for Reproductive Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Third Hospital Beijing 100000, China

    National Clinical Research Center for Obstetrics and Gynecology (Peking University Third Hospital) Beijing 100000, China

    Key Laboratory of Assisted Reproduction, Ministry of Education (Peking University) Beijing 100000, China

    Beijing Key Laboratory of Reproductive Endocrinology and Assisted Reproductive Technology Beijing 100000, China
    Search for articles by this author
  • Jie Qiao
    Correspondence
    Corresponding author.
    Affiliations
    Center for Reproductive Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Third Hospital Beijing 100000, China

    National Clinical Research Center for Obstetrics and Gynecology (Peking University Third Hospital) Beijing 100000, China

    Key Laboratory of Assisted Reproduction, Ministry of Education (Peking University) Beijing 100000, China

    Beijing Key Laboratory of Reproductive Endocrinology and Assisted Reproductive Technology Beijing 100000, China

    Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The Second Hospital of Shanxi Medical University, Taiyuan City 030000, China

    Beijing Advanced Innovation Center for Genomics Beijing 100000, China

    Peking-Tsinghua Center for Life Science Beijing 100000, China
    Search for articles by this author
  • Author Footnotes
    1 Contributed equally.
Published:September 25, 2022DOI:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2022.09.021

      Abstract

      Research question

      What is the effect of adenomyosis types on IVF and embryo transfer (IVF-ET) after ultra-long gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist protocol?

      Design

      Patients who underwent the first cycle of IVF-ET with ultra-long GnRH agonist protocol were included in this retrospective cohort study. They were divided into three groups: (A) 428 patients with diffuse adenomyosis; (B) 718 patients with focal adenomyosis; and (C) 519 patients with tubal infertility. Reproduction outcomes were analysed.

      Results

      Logistic regression analysis revealed that, compared with focal adenomyosis and tubal infertility, diffuse adenomyosis was negatively associated with clinical pregnancy and live birth (clinical pregnancy: A versus B: OR 0.708, 95% CI 0.539 to 0.931, P = 0.013; A versus C: OR 0.663, 95% CI 0.489 to 0.899, P = 0.008; live birth: A versus B: OR 0.530, 95% CI 0.385 to 0.730, P < 0.001; A versus C: OR 0.441, 95% CI 0.313 to 0.623, P < 0.001), but positively associated with miscarriage (A versus B: OR 1.727, 95% CI 1.056 to 2.825, P = 0.029; A versus C: OR 2.549, 95% CI 1.278 to 5.082, P = 0.008). Compared with patients with tubal infertility, focal adenomyosis was also a risk factor for miscarriage (B versus C: OR 1.825, 95% CI 1.112 to 2.995, P = 0.017).

      Conclusions

      Compared with patients with focal adenomyosis or tubal infertility, the reproduction outcomes of IVF-ET in patients with diffuse adenomyosis seems to be worse.

      KEYWORDS

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Reproductive BioMedicine Online
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Ayako H.
        • Takayuki I.
        • Seisuke S.
        • Toshio N.
        • Atsushi K.
        • Akito M.
        • Osamu N.
        • Takeshi N.
        • Yutaka O.
        • Tomoyuki F.
        ST AC.
        J. Matern. Neonatal Med. 2017; (0, 000)https://doi.org/10.1080/14767058.2017.1285895
        • Ballester M.
        • Dargent E.M.
        • Morcel K.
        • Belaisch-Allart J.
        • Nisolle M.
        • Daraí E.
        Cumulative pregnancy rate after ICSI-IVF in patients with colorectal endometriosis: results of a multicentre study.
        Hum. Reprod. 2012; 27: 1043-1049https://doi.org/10.1093/HUMREP/DES012
        • Bazot M.
        • Daraï E.
        Role of transvaginal sonography and magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of uterine adenomyosis.
        Fertil. Steril. 2018; 109: 389-397https://doi.org/10.1016/J.FERTNSTERT.2018.01.024
        • Bourdon M.
        • Santulli P.
        • Chouzenoux S.
        • Maignien C.
        • Bailly K.
        • Andrieu M.
        • Millischer A.E.
        • Doridot L.
        • Marcellin L.
        • Batteux F.
        • Chapron C.
        The Disease Phenotype of Adenomyosis-Affected Women Correlates With Specific Serum Cytokine Profiles.
        Reprod. Sci. 2019; 26: 198-206https://doi.org/10.1177/1933719118816852
        • Chapron C.
        • Tosti C.
        • Marcellin L.
        • Bourdon M.
        • Lafay-Pillet M.C.
        • Millischer A.E.
        • Streuli I.
        • Borghese B.
        • Petraglia F.
        • Santulli P.
        Relationship between the magnetic resonance imaging appearance of adenomyosis and endometriosis phenotypes.
        Hum. Reprod. 2017; 32: 1393-1401https://doi.org/10.1093/HUMREP/DEX088
        • Cunningham R.K.
        • Horrow M.M.
        • Smith R.J.
        • Springer J.
        Adenomyosis: A sonographic diagnosis.
        Radiographics. 2018; 38: 1576-1589https://doi.org/10.1148/rg.2018180080
        • Donnez J.
        • Stratopoulou C.A.
        • Dolmans M.M.
        Uterine Adenomyosis: From Disease Pathogenesis to a New Medical Approach Using GnRH Antagonists.
        Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health. 2021; 18: 1-12https://doi.org/10.3390/IJERPH18199941
        • Exacoustos C.
        • Manganaro L.
        • Zupi E.
        Imaging for the evaluation of endometriosis and adenomyosis.
        Best Pract. Res. Clin. Obstet. Gynaecol. 2014; https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2014.04.010
        • Exacoustos C.
        • Morosetti G.
        • Conway F.
        • Camilli S.
        • Martire F.G.
        • Lazzeri L.
        • Piccione E.
        • Zupi E.
        New Sonographic Classification of Adenomyosis: Do Type and Degree of Adenomyosis Correlate to Severity of Symptoms?.
        J. Minim. Invasive Gynecol. 2020; 27: 1308-1315https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JMIG.2019.09.788
        • García-Solares J.
        • Donnez J.
        • Donnez O.
        • Dolmans M.M.
        Pathogenesis of uterine adenomyosis: invagination or metaplasia?.
        Fertil. Steril. 2018; 109: 371-379https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.12.030
        • Guo S.W.
        The pathogenesis of adenomyosis vis-à-vis endometriosis.
        J. Clin. Med. 2020; 9https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm9020485
        • Harmsen M.J.
        • Van den Bosch T.
        • Leeuw R.A.
        • Dueholm M.
        • Exacoustos C.
        • Valentin L.
        • Hehenkamp W.
        • Groenman F.
        • De Bruyn C.
        • Rasmussen C.
        • Lazzeri L.
        • Jokubkiene L.
        • Jurkovic D.
        • Naftalin J.
        • Tellum T.
        • Bourne T.
        • Timmerman D.
        • Huirne J.A.F.
        Consensus on revised definitions of morphological uterus sonographic assessment (MUSA) features of adenomyosis: results of a modified Delphi procedure.
        Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. Online. 2021; https://doi.org/10.1002/UOG.24786
        • Horton J.
        • Sterrenburg M.
        • Lane S.
        • Maheshwari A.
        • Li T.C.
        • Cheong Y.
        Reproductive, obstetric, and perinatal outcomes of women with adenomyosis and endometriosis: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
        Hum. Reprod. Update. 2019; 25: 593-633https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmz012
        • Hou X.
        • Xing J.
        • Shan H.
        • Mei J.
        • Sun Y.
        • Yan G.
        • Sun H.
        • Wang J.
        The effect of adenomyosis on IVF after long or ultra-long GnRH agonist treatment.
        Reprod. Biomed. Online. 2020; 41: 845-853https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2020.07.027
        • Huang L.
        • Li H.
        • Yu Q.
        • Sun A.
        • Tian Q.
        • Chen R.
        • Deng S.
        Association between subtypes of adenomyosis and reproductive outcomes.
        J. Reprod. Med. 2020; 29: 155-161
        • Iwasawa T.
        • Takahashi T.
        • Maeda E.
        • Ishiyama K.
        • Takahashi S.
        • Suganuma R.
        • Matsuo K.
        • Tachibana M.
        • Fukuhara R.
        • Shirasawa H.
        • Sato W.
        • Kumazawa Y.
        • Terada Y.
        Effects of localisation of uterine adenomyosis on outcome of in vitro fertilisation/intracytoplasmic sperm injection fresh and frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles: a multicentre retrospective cohort study.
        Reprod. Biol. Endocrinol. 2021; 19: 1-11https://doi.org/10.1186/s12958-021-00764-7
        • Lazzeri L.
        • Morosetti G.
        • Centini G.
        • Monti G.
        • Zupi E.
        • Piccione E.
        • Exacoustos C.
        A sonographic classification of adenomyosis: interobserver reproducibility in the evaluation of type and degree of the myometrial involvement.
        Fertil. Steril. 2018; 110: 1154-1161https://doi.org/10.1016/J.FERTNSTERT.2018.06.031
        • Li X.
        • Pan N.
        • Zhang W.
        • Wang Y.
        Association between uterine volume and pregnancy outcomes in adenomyosis patients undergoing frozen-thawed embryo transfer.
        Reprod. Biomed. Online. 2021; 42: 384-389https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2020.10.002
        • Liu Q.
        • Huang S.
        • Yao J.
        • Ou X.
        Expression of Th1/Th2 cytokines in serum in recurrent spontaneous abortion.
        J. Southeast Univ. 2011; 30: 565-568
        • Maubon A.
        • Faury A.
        • Kapella M.
        • Pouquet M.
        • Piver P.
        Uterine junctional zone at magnetic resonance imaging: a predictor of in vitro fertilization implantation failure.
        J. Obstet. Gynaecol. Res. 2010; 36: 611-618https://doi.org/10.1111/J.1447-0756.2010.01189.X
        • Munro M.G.
        Classification and Reporting Systems for Adenomyosis.
        J. Minim. Invasive Gynecol. 2020; 27: 296-308https://doi.org/10.1016/J.JMIG.2019.11.013
        • Sam M.
        • Raubenheimer M.
        • Manolea F.
        • Aguilar H.
        • Mathew R.P.
        • Patel V.H.
        • Low G.
        Accuracy of findings in the diagnosis of uterine adenomyosis on ultrasound.
        Abdom. Radiol. (New York). 2020; 45: 842-850https://doi.org/10.1007/S00261-019-02231-9
        • Sheth S.S.
        • Hajari A.R.
        • Lulla C.P.
        • Kshirsagar D.
        Sonographic evaluation of uterine volume and its clinical importance.
        J. Obstet. Gynaecol. Res. 2017; 43: 185-189https://doi.org/10.1111/JOG.13189
        • Stratopoulou C.A.
        • Donnez J.
        • Dolmans M.M.
        Origin and Pathogenic Mechanisms of Uterine Adenomyosis: What Is Known So Far.
        Reprod. Sci. 2021; 28: 2087-2097https://doi.org/10.1007/s43032-020-00361-w
        • Tremellen K.P.
        • Russell P.
        The distribution of immune cells and macrophages in the endometrium of women with recurrent reproductive failure. II: Adenomyosis and macrophages.
        J. Reprod. Immunol. 2012; 93: 58-63https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jri.2011.12.001
        • Van den Bosch T.
        • de Bruijn A.M.
        • de Leeuw R.A.
        • Dueholm M.
        • Exacoustos C.
        • Valentin L.
        • Bourne T.
        • Timmerman D.
        • Huirne J.A.F.
        Sonographic classification and reporting system for diagnosing adenomyosis.
        Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2019; 53: 576-582https://doi.org/10.1002/UOG.19096
        • Van Den Bosch T.
        • Dueholm M.
        • Leone F.P.G.
        • Valentin L.
        • Rasmussen C.K.
        • Votino A.
        • Van Schoubroeck D.
        • Landolfo C.
        • Installé A.J.F.
        • Guerriero S.
        • Exacoustos C.
        • Gordts S.
        • Benacerraf B.
        • D'Hooghe T.
        • De Moor B.
        • Brölmann H.
        • Goldstein S.
        • Epstein E.
        • Bourne T.
        • Timmerman D.
        Terms, definitions and measurements to describe sonographic features of myometrium and uterine masses: a consensus opinion from the Morphological Uterus Sonographic Assessment (MUSA) group.
        Ultrasound Obstet. Gynecol. 2015; 46: 284-298https://doi.org/10.1002/UOG.14806
        • Yang R.
        • Zhang C.
        • Chen L.
        • Wang Y.
        • Li R.
        • Liu P.
        • Qiao J.
        Cumulative live birth rate of low prognosis patients with POSEIDON stratification: a single-centre data analysis.
        Reprod. Biomed. Online. 2020; 00: 1-11https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2020.08.003
        • Zannoni L.
        • Ambrosio M.
        • Raimondo D.
        • Arena A.
        • Del Forno S.
        • Borghese G.
        • Paradisi R.
        • Seracchioli R.
        Question Mark Sign and Transvaginal Ultrasound Uterine Tenderness for the Diagnosis of Adenomyosis: A Prospective Validation.
        J. Ultrasound Med. 2020; 39: 1405-1412https://doi.org/10.1002/JUM.15237

      Biography

      Bing Han is a medical student at the Center for Reproductive Medicine, Peking University Third Hospital. Her research interests include adenomyosis, endocrine disorders and female infertility.
      Key message
      Compared with patients with focal adenomyosis or tubal infertility, the reproduction outcomes of IVF and embryo transfer (IVF-ET) in patients with diffuse adenomyosis seems to be worse. It may be important to identify the type of adenomyosis before IVF-ET, which is helpful for predicting reproductive outcomes.