Skip to main content

Table 2 Basic parameters and endometrium thickness (ET) in the cycle consecutive to the miscarriage cycle of the different management groups

From: Endometrial thickness following early miscarriage in IVF patients – is there a preferred management approach?

Parameter

Conservative management

Misoprostol

D&C

P value

N of patients

78

61

84

 

Time from miscarriage cycle (months)

5.4 ± 3.5 (4(3–6))

5.1 ± 2.4(5(3–6))

5.9 ± 2.9(5(4–7))

0.43

Fresh consecutive cycle

28/78(35.9%)

29/61(47.5%)

40/84(47.6%)

0.24

Frozen-thawed consecutive cycle

50/78(64.1%)

32/61(52.5%)

44/84(52.4%)

0.24

Peak Estradiol levels (fresh cycle; pmol/l)

4527.7 ± 2706.9(4268(3047–6472))

5164.9 ± 3639.4(4821(3528–6599)

4805.7 ± 2706.1(3961(2042–5623))

0.56

Grade A embryos (%)

27.1 + 37.7

28.0 + 36.2

31.3 + 36.1

0.91

Grade B embryos (%)

47.6 + 43.3

58.0 + 40.6

45.2 + 38.9

0.70

Grade C embryos (%)

6.3 + 18.8

1.3 + 3.7

10.1 + 22.8

0.21

N of transferred embryos

1.6 ± 0.8(2(1–2))

1.7 ± 0.8(2(1–2))

2.0 ± 1.0(2(1–3))

0.41

ET (mm) at day of hCG/LH/P

9.9 ± 2.1(10(8–11))

10.3 ± 2.3(10(9–11))

9.1 ± 2.4(10(9–11))

0.005b

Comparison of ET between miscarriage cycle and consecutive cyclea

Difference at day of hCG/LH/P (mm)

0.0 ± 1.7(0(−1–1))

0.2 ± 2.2(0(−1–1))

−1.0 ± 2.4(−1(−2–0))

0.002b

% of change at day of hCG/LH/P

−0.9 ± 17.4(1(− 8–10))

3.5 ± 21.7(0(−8–10))

−8.2 ± 22.3(−8(−25–3))

0.001b

Decrease of > 2 mm in ET at day of hCG/LH/P

11/78(14.1%) C

4/61(6.6%) C

25/84(29.8%)

< 0.001

Reproductive outcomes

Implantation rate

32/105 (30.5%)C

18/102 (17.7%)

16/144 (11.1%)

< 0.001

Clinical pregnancy rate

30/78 (38.5%)C

17/61 (27.9%)

14/84 (16.7%)

0.008

Miscarriage rate

12/30 (40.0%)

7/17 (41.2%)

5/14 (35.7%)

0.947

Live birth rate

18/78 (23.1%)

10/61 (16.4%)

9/84 (10.7%)

0.107

  1. Data presented as mean ± SD (Median (IQR)) or n/N(%)
  2. Note: D&C Dilation and curettage, ET Endometrial thickness, hCG/LH/P Day of human chorionic gonadotropin administration in fresh IVF cycles, luteinizing hormone surge or progesterone administration in frozen-thawed cycles
  3. aEvaluated by one-way ANOVA and Kruskal-Wallis Test, showing significant difference in post hoc test between the conservative management and the D&C groups
  4. bEvaluated by one-way ANOVA and Kruskal-Wallis Test, showing significant difference in post hoc test between both conservative and Misoprostol and the D&C group
  5. CEvaluated by post hoc Bonferroni test, showing significant difference compared to the D&C groups