What do systematic reviews say?

Letrozole vs laparoscopic ovarian drilling

It is very uncertain whether letrozole changes multiple pregnancy rate compared with laparoscopic ovarian drilling (very low certainty).

• Aromatase inhibitors (letrozole) for ovulation induction in infertile women with polycystic ovary syndrome 2022 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  OR 3 [0.12, 74.9]
  1 study · 141 participants
  Very low

Letrozole vs laparoscopic ovarian drilling

It is very uncertain whether letrozole changes live birth rate compared with laparoscopic ovarian drilling (very low certainty).

• Aromatase inhibitors (letrozole) for ovulation induction in infertile women with polycystic ovary syndrome 2022 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  OR 2.07 [0.99, 4.32]
  1 study · 141 participants
  Very low

Letrozole vs laparoscopic ovarian drilling

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Aromatase inhibitors (letrozole) for ovulation induction in infertile women with polycystic ovary syndrome 2022 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Letrozole vs laparoscopic ovarian drilling

Letrozole showed no clear difference in clinical pregnancy rate compared with laparoscopic ovarian drilling (low certainty).

• Aromatase inhibitors (letrozole) for ovulation induction in infertile women with polycystic ovary syndrome 2022 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  OR 1.47 [0.95, 2.28]
  3 studies · 376 participants
  Low

Letrozole vs laparoscopic ovarian drilling

Letrozole showed no clear difference in miscarriage rate per pregnancy compared with laparoscopic ovarian drilling (low certainty).

• Aromatase inhibitors (letrozole) for ovulation induction in infertile women with polycystic ovary syndrome 2022 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  OR 0.65 [0.22, 1.92]
  3 studies · 122 participants
  Low

Transvaginal aspiration of hydrosalpingeal fluid vs laparoscopic salpingectomy

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Surgical treatment for tubal disease in women due to undergo in vitro fertilisation 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

Transvaginal aspiration of hydrosalpingeal fluid vs laparoscopic salpingectomy

• Surgical treatment for tubal disease in women due to undergo in vitro fertilisation 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  1 study · 160 participants
  GRADE not reported

Transvaginal aspiration of hydrosalpingeal fluid vs laparoscopic salpingectomy

It is very uncertain whether transvaginal aspiration of hydrosalpingeal fluid changes clinical pregnancy rate compared with laparoscopic salpingectomy (very low certainty).

• Surgical treatment for tubal disease in women due to undergo in vitro fertilisation 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  RR 0.69 [0.44, 1.07]
  1 study · 160 participants
  Very low

Transvaginal aspiration of hydrosalpingeal fluid vs laparoscopic salpingectomy

It is very uncertain whether transvaginal aspiration of hydrosalpingeal fluid changes miscarriage rate compared with laparoscopic salpingectomy (very low certainty).

• Surgical treatment for tubal disease in women due to undergo in vitro fertilisation 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  Peto OR 1 [0.2, 5.08]
  1 study · 160 participants
  Very low

Transvaginal aspiration of hydrosalpingeal fluid vs laparoscopic salpingectomy

It is very uncertain whether transvaginal aspiration of hydrosalpingeal fluid changes ectopic pregnancy rate compared with laparoscopic salpingectomy (very low certainty).

• Surgical treatment for tubal disease in women due to undergo in vitro fertilisation 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  Peto OR 7.39 [0.15, 372.38]
  1 study · 160 participants
  Very low

LOD with and without medical ovulation vs medical ovulation induction alone

LOD with and without medical ovulation may leads to lower live birth compared with medical ovulation induction alone (low certainty).

• Laparoscopic ovarian drilling for ovulation induction in women with anovulatory polycystic ovary syndrome 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  OR 0.71 [0.54, 0.92]
  9 studies · 1015 participants
  Low
• Laparoscopic ovarian drilling for ovulation induction in women with anovulatory polycystic ovary syndrome 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  OR 0.9 [0.59, 1.36]
  4 studies · 415 participants
  Low

LOD of one ovary (unilateral) vs LOD of both ovaries (bilateral)

It is very uncertain whether LOD of one ovary (unilateral) changes miscarriage compared with LOD of both ovaries (bilateral) (very low certainty).

• Laparoscopic ovarian drilling for ovulation induction in women with anovulatory polycystic ovary syndrome 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  Peto OR 1.02 [0.31, 3.33]
  2 studies · 131 participants
  Very low

LOD of one ovary (unilateral) vs LOD of both ovaries (bilateral)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Laparoscopic ovarian drilling for ovulation induction in women with anovulatory polycystic ovary syndrome 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

LOD with and without medical ovulation vs medical ovulation induction alone

LOD with and without medical ovulation probably leads to lower multiple pregnancy compared with medical ovulation induction alone (moderate certainty).

• Laparoscopic ovarian drilling for ovulation induction in women with anovulatory polycystic ovary syndrome 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  Peto OR 0.34 [0.18, 0.66]
  14 studies · 1161 participants
  Moderate

LOD with and without medical ovulation vs medical ovulation induction alone

LOD with and without medical ovulation showed no clear difference in clincial pregnancy compared with medical ovulation induction alone (low certainty).

• Laparoscopic ovarian drilling for ovulation induction in women with anovulatory polycystic ovary syndrome 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  OR 0.86 [0.72, 1.03]
  21 studies · 2016 participants
  Low

LOD with and without medical ovulation vs medical ovulation induction alone

LOD with and without medical ovulation showed no clear difference in miscarriage compared with medical ovulation induction alone (low certainty).

• Laparoscopic ovarian drilling for ovulation induction in women with anovulatory polycystic ovary syndrome 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  Peto OR 1.11 [0.78, 1.59]
  19 studies · 1909 participants
  Low

LOD with and without medical ovulation vs medical ovulation induction alone

LOD with and without medical ovulation may leads to lower OHSS compared with medical ovulation induction alone (low certainty).

• Laparoscopic ovarian drilling for ovulation induction in women with anovulatory polycystic ovary syndrome 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  Peto OR 0.25 [0.07, 0.91]
  8 studies · 722 participants
  Low

LOD of one ovary (unilateral) vs LOD of both ovaries (bilateral)

It is very uncertain whether LOD of one ovary (unilateral) changes live birth compared with LOD of both ovaries (bilateral) (very low certainty).

• Laparoscopic ovarian drilling for ovulation induction in women with anovulatory polycystic ovary syndrome 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  OR 0.83 [0.24, 2.78]
  1 study · 44 participants
  Very low

LOD of one ovary (unilateral) vs LOD of both ovaries (bilateral)

The review found no eligible studies for this question.

• Laparoscopic ovarian drilling for ovulation induction in women with anovulatory polycystic ovary syndrome 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  no estimate extracted
  Studies not reported
  No studies found

LOD of one ovary (unilateral) vs LOD of both ovaries (bilateral)

LOD of one ovary (unilateral) may leads to lower clinical pregnancy compared with LOD of both ovaries (bilateral) (low certainty).

• Laparoscopic ovarian drilling for ovulation induction in women with anovulatory polycystic ovary syndrome 2020 · Cochrane Headline outcomes only
  OR 0.57 [0.39, 0.84]
  7 studies · 470 participants
  Low