Cochrane · systematic review · CD004507
Semen preparation techniques for intrauterine insemination
Boomsma, CM, Cohlen, BJ, Farquhar, C · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2019 · Cochrane Library
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
15
current version
GRADE rated
10
No studies
5
Included studies
NR
No studies 5 · 33.3%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 10 · 66.7%Low 0 · 0%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Show all 2 versionsSwim‐up technique compared to gradient technique for undergoing intrauterine insemination
Population: patients undergoing intrauterine insemination (fresh semen)
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Live birth rate per couple Swim‐up technique vs gradient technique | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Clinical pregnancy rate per couple Swim‐up technique vs gradient technique | OR 0.83 [0.51, 1.35] | 4 studies · 370 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency |
Ongoing pregnancy rate per couple Swim‐up technique vs gradient technique | OR 0.39 [0.19, 0.82] | 1 study · 223 participants | Very low Downgraded: imprecision |
Multiple pregnancy rate per couple Swim‐up technique vs gradient technique | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 25 participants | Very low Downgraded: imprecision |
Miscarriage rate per couple Swim‐up technique vs gradient technique | OR 0.85 [0.28, 2.59] | 3 studies · 330 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency |
Swim‐up technique compared to wash and centrifugation for undergoing intrauterine insemination
Population: patients undergoing intrauterine insemination (fresh semen)
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Live birth rate per couple Swim‐up technique vs wash and centrifugation | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Clinical pregnancy rate per couple Swim‐up technique vs wash and centrifugation | OR 0.41 [0.15, 1.13] | 2 studies · 78 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency |
Ongoing pregnancy rate per couple Swim‐up technique vs wash and centrifugation | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Multiple pregnancy rate per couple Swim‐up technique vs wash and centrifugation | OR 0.49 [0.02, 13.28] | 1 study · 26 participants | Very low Downgraded: imprecision |
Miscarriage rate per couple Swim‐up technique vs wash and centrifugation | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 20 participants | Very low Downgraded: imprecision |
Gradient technique compared to wash and centrifugation for undergoing intrauterine insemination
Population: patients with undergoing intrauterine insemination (fresh semen)
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Live birth rate per couple Gradient technique vs wash and centrifugation | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Clinical pregnancy rate per couple Gradient technique vs wash and centrifugation | OR 1.78 [0.58, 5.46] | 2 studies · 94 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision, inconsistency |
Ongoing pregnancy rate per couple Gradient technique vs wash and centrifugation | no estimate extracted | NR | No studies |
Multiple pregnancy rate per couple Gradient technique vs wash and centrifugation | OR 0.33 [0.01, 8.83] | 1 study · 31 participants | Very low Downgraded: imprecision |
Miscarriage rate per couple Gradient technique vs wash and centrifugation | OR 6.11 [0.27, 138.45] | 1 study · 31 participants | Very low Downgraded: imprecision |