Fertility and Sterility
Volume 94, Issue 4 , Pages 1261-1266 , September 2010

Double versus single intrauterine insemination for unexplained infertility: a meta-analysis of randomized trials

  • Nikolaos P. Polyzos, M.D.

      Affiliations

    • Section of Obstetrics and Gynaecology and Public Health, Panhellenic Association for Continual Medical Research, Athens, Greece
    • Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests: Nikolaos P. Polyzos, MD, Panhellenic Association for Continual Medical Research, Section of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 28 Metamorfoseos St, 38333, Volos, Greece (FAX: 0030 26510 44062
    • ,
  • Spyridon Tzioras, M.D., Ph.D.

      Affiliations

    • Section of Obstetrics and Gynaecology and Public Health, Panhellenic Association for Continual Medical Research, Athens, Greece
    • ,
  • Davide Mauri, M.D., Ph.D.

      Affiliations

    • Section of Obstetrics and Gynaecology and Public Health, Panhellenic Association for Continual Medical Research, Athens, Greece
    • ,
  • Athina Tatsioni, M.D., Ph.D.

      Affiliations

    • Department of Medicine, Tufts University School of Medicine, Boston, Massachusetts

Received 17 April 2009 ,Revised 20 June 2009 ,Accepted 24 June 2009.

References 

  1. Claman P, Wilkie V, Collins D. Timing intrauterine insemination either 33 or 39 hours after administration of human chorionic gonadotropin yields the same pregnancy rates as after superovulation therapy. Fertil Steril. 2004;82:13–16
  2. Ragni G, Somigliana E, Vegetti W. Timing of intrauterine insemination: where are we?. Fertil Steril. 2004;82:25–26
  3. Ragni G, Maggioni P, Guermandi E, Testa A, Baroni E, Colombo M, et al. Efficacy of double intrauterine insemination in controlled ovarian hyperstimulation cycles. Fertil Steril. 1999;72:619–622
  4. Steures P, van der Steeg JW, Hompes PG, Habbema JD, Eijkemans MJ, Broekmans FJ, et al. Intrauterine insemination with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation versus expectant management for couples with unexplained subfertility and an intermediate prognosis: a randomised clinical trial. Lancet. 2006;368(9531):216–221
  5. Bhattacharya S, Harrild K, Mollison J, Wordsworth S, Tay C, Harrold A, et al. Clomifene citrate or unstimulated intrauterine insemination compared with expectant management for unexplained infertility: pragmatic randomised controlled trial. BMJ. 2008;337:a716
  6. Osuna C, Matorras R, Pijoan JI, Rodríguez-Escudero FJ. One versus two inseminations per cycle in intrauterine insemination with sperm from patients' husbands: a systematic review of the literature. Fertil Steril. 2004;82:17–24
  7. Lau J, Ioannidis JP, Schmid CH. Quantitative synthesis in systematic reviews. Ann Intern Med. 1997;127:820–826
  8. Pettiti D. Meta-analysis, decision analysis and cost-effectiveness analysis. 2nd ed.. New York: Oxford University Press; 1999;
  9. Malhotra N, Gupta S, Rehman SM, Roy KK, Kumar S, Agarwal . A Comparison of single vs. double intrauterine insemination in unexplained infertility—a randomized control trial. Fertil Steril. 2007;88(S1):S102
  10. Casadei L, Zamaro V, Calcagni M, Ticconi C, Dorrucci M, Piccione E. Homologous intrauterine insemination in controlled ovarian hyperstimulation cycles: a comparison among three different regimens. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2006;129:155–161
  11. Ng EH, Makkar G, Yeung WS, Ho PC. A randomized comparison of three insemination methods in an artificial insemination program using husbands' semen. J Reprod Med. 2003;48:542–546
  12. Peddie V, Hamilton M, Evans PA. Superovulation and intra-uterine insemination - single versus dual insemination. J Reprod Fertil. 1997;19(Suppl):39
  13. Liu W, Gong F, Luo K, Lu G. Comparing the pregnancy rates of one versus two intrauterine inseminations (IUIs) in male factor and idiopathic infertility. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2006;23:75–79
  14. Alborzi S, Motazedian S, Parsanezhad ME, Jannati S. Comparison of the effectiveness of single intrauterine insemination (IUI) versus double IUI per cycle in infertile patients. Fertil Steril. 2003;80:595–599
  15. Zeyneloglu HB. Single versus double intrauterine insemination: are outcomes affected?. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2004;16:251–256
  16. Silverberg KM, Olive DL, Burns WN, Johnson JV, Groff TR, Schenken RS. Follicular size at the time of human chorionic gonadotropin administration predicts ovulation outcome in human menopausal gonadotropin-stimulated cycles. Fertil Steril. 1991;56:296–300
  17. Cantineau AE, Heineman MJ, Cohlen BJ. Single versus double intrauterine insemination (IUI) in stimulated cycles for subfertile couples. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2003;(1):CD003854
  18. Erdem A, Erdem M, Atmaca S, Korucuoglu U, Karabacak O. Factors affecting live birth rate in intrauterine insemination cycles with recombinant gonadotrophin stimulation. Reprod Biomed Online. 2008;17:199–206
  19. Nuojua-Huttunen S, Tomas C, Bloigu R, Tuomivaara L, Martikainen H. Intrauterine insemination treatment in subfertility: an analysis of factors affecting outcome. Hum Reprod. 1999;14:698–703
  20. Daya S. Pitfalls in the design and analysis of efficacy trials in subfertility. Hum Reprod. 2003;18:1005–1009
  21. Daya S. Methodologic pitfalls in assessing the efficacy of recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone versus human menopausal gonadotropin in assisted reproduction. Fertil Steril. 2003;80(5):1100–1104
  22. Templeton AA, van Look P, Angell RE, Aitken RJ, Lumsden MA, Baird DT. Oocyte recovery and fertilization rates in women at various times after the administration of hCG. J Reprod Fertil. 1986;76:771–778
  23. Cohlen BJ, te Velde ER, van Kooij RJ, Looman CW, Habbema JD. Controlled ovarian hyperstimulation and intrauterine insemination for treating male subfertility: a controlled study. Hum Reprod. 1998;13:1553–1558
  24. Boomsma CM, Heineman MJ, Cohlen BJ, Farquhar C. Semen preparation techniques for intrauterine insemination. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2007;(4):CD004507
  25. Hardy RJ, Thompson SG. Detecting and describing heterogeneity in meta-analysis. Stat Med. 1998;17:841–856
  26. Polyzos NP, Mauri D, Tzioras S. Letrozole in ovulation induction: time to make decisions. Hum Reprod Update. 2009;15:263–264
  27. Schulz KF, Chalmers I, Hayes RJ, Altman DG. Empirical evidence of bias. Dimensions of methodological quality associated with 609 estimates of treatment effects in controlled trials. J Am Med Assoc. 1995;273:408–412
  28. Balk EM, Bonis PA, Moskowitz H, Schmid CH, Ioannidis JP, Wang C, et al. Correlation of quality measures with estimates of treatment effect in meta-analyses of randomized controlled trials. J Am Med Assoc. 2002;287:2973–2982

 N.P.P. has nothing to disclose. S.T. has nothing to disclose. D.M. has nothing to disclose. A.T. has nothing to disclose.

PII: S0015-0282(09)01426-5

doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.06.052

Fertility and Sterility
Volume 94, Issue 4 , Pages 1261-1266 , September 2010

Article Tools

* Image Usage & Resolution