Fertility and Sterility
Volume 92, Issue 3 , Pages 918-922, September 2009

Ultrasonographer experience does not impact outcomes following ultrasound-guided embryo transfer

  • Isiah D. Harris, M.D.

      Affiliations

    • Vincent Memorial Obstetrics and Gynecology Service, Massachusetts General Hospital/Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
    • Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests: Isiah D. Harris, M.D., Obstetrics, Gynecology, and Reproductive Biology, 75 Francis Street, Boston, MA 02115 (FAX: 617-730-2833).
  • ,
  • Aaron K. Styer, M.D.

      Affiliations

    • Vincent Memorial Obstetrics and Gynecology Service, Massachusetts General Hospital/Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
    • Massachusetts General Hospital Fertility Center, Massachusetts General Hospital/Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
  • ,
  • John C. Petrozza, M.D.

      Affiliations

    • Vincent Memorial Obstetrics and Gynecology Service, Massachusetts General Hospital/Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
    • Massachusetts General Hospital Fertility Center, Massachusetts General Hospital/Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts

Received 17 February 2008; received in revised form 29 June 2008; accepted 14 July 2008. published online 09 September 2008.

Objective

To determine the effect of sonographer experience during ultrasound guided embryo transfer on pregnancy outcomes.

Design

Retrospective chart review.

Setting

A university-based academic practice.

Patient(s)

A total of 319 women who underwent in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF-ET) from the site-specific clinic. A total of 118 women (37%) underwent embryo transfers with a medical assistant (inexperienced ultrasonographer) performing ultrasound guidance, and 201 women (63%) underwent embryo transfers by an REI fellow (experienced ultrasonagrapher) performing the US guidance.

Intervention(s)

Real-time transabdominal ultrasound guidance during IVF-ET.

Main Outcome Measure(s)

Respective biochemical, clinical, and live birth rates following ultrasound-guided IVF-ET performed by either experienced or nonexperienced sonographers.

Result(s)

The two groups were similar in baseline characteristics or treatment response. Pregnancy outcomes were similar in both groups, with the MA cohort demonstrating clinical pregnancy rate of 43.2% and a live birth rate of 35.6%, and the REI fellow group yielding a clinical pregnancy rate of 44.8% and a live birth rate 35.8%, respectively.

Conclusion(s)

The clinical experience of the person performing ultrasound guidance during IVF-ET does not have an effect on clinical outcome. Thus, the use of an assistant without formal ultrasound training during IVF-ET is a reasonable option.

Key Words: IVF-ET, embryo transfer, pregnancy, ultrasound

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 I.D.H. has nothing to disclose. A.K.S. has nothing to disclose. J.C.P. has nothing to disclose.

PII: S0015-0282(08)03260-3

doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.07.1743

Fertility and Sterility
Volume 92, Issue 3 , Pages 918-922, September 2009