The effect of endometrial thickness and pattern measured by ultrasonography on pregnancy outcomes during IVF-ET cycles

Table 2 Clinical outcome by endometrial pattern and thickness

Groups (n)	P on HCG day (ng/mol)	No. of embryos transplanted (n)	No. of clinical cycles (n)	No. of embryos implanted(n)	Clinical pregnancy rate(%)	Implantation rate (%)
Pattern A (1094)	0.58 ± 0.41^ab	2315	604	818	55.2^*△	35.3^★▲
Pattern B (684)	0.65 ± 0.53^bc	1455	348	467	50.9^*○	32.1^★◆
Pattern C (155)	0.79 ± 0.65^ca	333	58	78	37.4^△○	23.4^▲◆
Group 1 (47)	-	-	-	-	25.5^◊※	13.0^●■
Group 2 (1749)	-	-	-	-	52.1^◊☆	33.8^●#
Group 3 (137)	-	-	-	-	63.5^※☆	39.1^■#

Note: Pattern A was defined a triple-line pattern consisting of a central hyperechogenic line surrounded by two hypoechoic layers; Pattern B was defined an intermediate isoechogenic pattern with the same reflectivity as the surrounding myometrium and a poorly defined central echogenic line; Pattern C was defined as homogeneous, hyperechogenic endometrium. Group 1: endometrial thickness was ≤7 mm; Group 2: endometrial thickness was >7 mm to ≤14 mm; Group 3: endometrial thickness was>14 mm.
^△P^○P < 0.05; ^★P^▲P^◆P < 0.05, ^aP^bP^cP < 0.01; ^☆P < 0.05, ^◊P^※P^●P^■P < 0.01. There is significant difference between the groups ( P < 0.05).

ISSN: 1477-7827