Cochrane · systematic review · CD006942
Synchronised approach for intrauterine insemination in subfertile couples
Cantineau, AEP, Janssen, MJ, Cohlen, BJ, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2014 · Cochrane Library
Gynaecology and FertilityAMSTAR 2: not assessed
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
23
current version
GRADE rated
23
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 10 · 43.5%Low 12 · 52.2%Moderate 1 · 4.3%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
hCG compared to LH surge for intrauterine insemination in subfertile couples
Population: women undergoing intrauterine insemination
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Live birth rate per couple hCG vs LH surge | OR 1 [0.06, 18.08] | 1 study · 24 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Pregnancy rate per couple hCG vs LH surge | OR 1.33 [0.72, 2.45] | 4 studies · 275 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Multiple pregnancy rate per pregnancy hCG vs LH surge | OR 1.12 [0.17, 7.6] | 2 studies · 42 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
u‐hCG compared to r‐hCG for intrauterine insemination in subfertile couples
Population: women undergoing intrauterine insemination
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Live birth rate per couple u‐hCG vs r‐hCG | OR 1.17 [0.68, 2.03] | 1 study · 284 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Pregnancy rate per couple u‐hCG vs r‐hCG | OR 1.02 [0.65, 1.57] | 2 studies · 409 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Multiple pregnancy rate per pregnancy u‐hCG vs r‐hCG | OR 0.99 [0.4, 2.47] | 2 studies · 109 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Miscarriage rate per pregnancy u‐hCG vs r‐hCG | OR 0.57 [0.13, 2.47] | 2 studies · 109 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
OHSS rate per cycle u‐hCG vs r‐hCG | no estimate extracted | 2 studies · 468 participants | Moderate Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Short interval compared to long interval for intrauterine insemination in subfertile couples
Population: women undergoing intrauterine insemination
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Live birth rate per couple ‐ 24 hours versus 34 to 36 hours Short interval vs long interval | OR 0.52 [0.27, 1] | 1 study · 204 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Pregnancy rate per couple ‐ 24 hours versus 34 to 36 hours Short interval vs long interval | OR 0.55 [0.31, 0.98] | 2 studies · 234 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Pregnancy rate per couple ‐ 24 hours versus 48 hours Short interval vs long interval | OR 0.44 [0.1, 1.92] | 1 study · 30 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Pregnancy rate per couple ‐ 34 to 36 hours versus 48 hours Short interval vs long interval | OR 0.58 [0.14, 2.48] | 1 study · 30 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Miscarriage rate per pregnancy ‐ 24 hours versus 34 to 36 hours Short interval vs long interval | OR 1.58 [0.35, 7.16] | 2 studies · 67 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Miscarriage rate per pregnancy ‐ 24 hours versus 48 hours Short interval vs long interval | OR 4 [0.27, 58.56] | 1 study · 15 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Miscarriage rate per pregnancy ‐ 34 to 36 hours versus 48 hours Short interval vs long interval | OR 1.33 [0.07, 25.91] | 1 study · 16 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
hCG compared to GnRH‐a for intrauterine insemination in subfertile couples
Population: women undergoing intrauterine insemination
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Live birth rate per couple hCG vs GnRH‐a | OR 1.04 [0.42, 2.56] | 3 studies · 104 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Pregnancy rate per couple hCG vs GnRH‐a | OR 1.14 [0.63, 2.08] | 4 studies · 206 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Multiple pregnancy rate per pregnancy hCG vs GnRH‐a | OR 0.15 [0.02, 1.38] | 4 studies · 74 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Miscarriage rate per pregnancy hCG vs GnRH‐a | OR 1.72 [0.48, 6.2] | 4 studies · 74 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
OHSS per cycle hCG vs GnRH‐a | OR 2.27 [0.65, 7.91] | 3 studies · 456 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, imprecision |
Early hCG compared to late hCG for intrauterine insemination in subfertile couples
Population: women undergoing intrauterine insemination
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Pregnancy rate per couple Early hCG vs late hCG | OR 1.32 [0.77, 2.25] | 1 study · 612 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Miscarriage rate Early hCG vs late hCG | OR 0.51 [0.08, 3.28] | 1 study · 65 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Differing dosages of hCG for intrauterine insemination in subfertile couples
Population: women undergoing intrauterine insemination
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Pregnancy rate per couple | OR 1.38 [0.28, 6.71] | 1 study · 66 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |