Graphical abstract Abstract Sex steroids are converted to bioactive metabolites and vice versa by endometrial steroid-metabolising enzymes. Studies indicate that alterations in this metabolism might affect endometrial receptivity. This pilot study determined whether the endometrial formation and inactivation of 17β-oestradiol differed between the supposedly embryo-receptive endometrium and non-receptive endometrium of women undergoing IVF/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). Endometrial biopsies were obtained from IVF/ICSI patients 5–8 days after ovulation in a natural cycle, prior to their second IVF/ICSI cycle with fresh embryo transfer (ET). Endometrial biopsies from patients who achieved clinical pregnancy after fresh ET ( n = 15) were compared with endometrial biopsies from patients that did not conceive after fresh ET ( n = 15). Formation of 17β-oestradiol (oxidative 17β-hydroxysteroid dehydrogenases (HSDs)), oestrone (reductive HSD17Bs) and inhibition of HSD17B1 activity were determined by high-performance liquid chromatography. The endometrial transcriptome was profiled using RNA sequencing followed by principal component analysis and differentially expressed gene analysis. The false discovery rate-adjusted P < 0.05 and log fold change >0.5 were selected as the screening threshold. Formation and inactivation of 17β-oestradiol resulted similar between groups. Inhibition of HSD17B1 activity was significantly higher in the non-pregnant group when only primary infertile women ( n = 12) were considered (27.1%, n = 5 vs 16.2%, n = 7, P = 0.04). Gene expression analysis confirmed the presence of HSD17B1 (encoding HSD17B1), HSD17B2 (encoding HSD17B2) and 33 of 46 analysed steroid metabolising enzymes in the endometrium. In the primary infertile subgroup ( n = 10) 12 DEGs were found including LINC02349 which has been linked to implantation. However, the exact relationship between steroid-metabolising enzyme activity, expression and implantation outcome requires further investigation in larger, well-defined patient groups. Lay summary Sex hormones are produced and broken down by enzymes that can be found in the endometrium (the inner lining of the womb). This enzyme activity might influence the chances of becoming pregnant. We compared (i) enzyme activity in the endometrium of 15 women who did and 15 women who did not become pregnant in their second in vitro fertilisation attempt, (ii) how enzyme activity can be blocked by an inhibitor, and (iii) differences in gene expression (the process by which instructions in our DNA are converted into a product). Enzyme activity was similar between groups. We found that in women who have never been pregnant in the past, inhibition of enzyme activity was higher and found differences in a gene that has been linked to the implantation of the embryo, but future studies should be performed in larger, well-defined patient groups to confirm these findings.

In women with unexplained infertility, tubal flushing with oil-based contrast during hysterosalpingography leads to significantly more live births as compared to tubal flushing with water-based contrast during hysterosalpingography. However, it is unknown whether incorporating tubal flushing with oil-based contrast in the initial fertility work-up results to a reduced time to conception leading to live birth when compared to delayed tubal flushing that is performed six months after the initial fertility work-up. We also aim to evaluate the effectiveness of tubal flushing with oil-based contrast during hysterosalpingography versus no tubal flushing in the first six months of the study. This study will be an investigator-initiated, open-label, international, multicenter, randomized controlled trial with a planned economic analysis alongside the study. Infertile women between 18 and 39 years of age, who have an ovulatory cycle, who are at low risk for tubal pathology and have been advised expectant management for at least six months (based on the Hunault prediction score) will be included in this study. Eligible women will be randomly allocated (1:1) to immediate tubal flushing (intervention) versus delayed tubal flushing (control group) by using web-based block randomization stratified per study center. The primary outcome is time to conception leading to live birth with conception within twelve months after randomization. We assess the cumulative conception rate at six and twelve months as two co-primary outcomes. Secondary outcomes include ongoing pregnancy rate, live birth rate, miscarriage rate, ectopic pregnancy rate, number of complications, procedural pain score and cost-effectiveness. To demonstrate or refute a shorter time to pregnancy of three months with a power of 90

Abstract Study question What is the cumulative ongoing pregnancy rate within one year after visiting the RIF outpatient clinic in patients with RIF after IVF/ICSI treatment? Summary answer The cumulative ongoing pregnancy rate was 42.9% with a mean time to pregnancy of 8.8 months (95% CI 7.5-10.1 months). What is known already An estimated portion of 10-15% of IVF patients experience RIF. Multiple add-on treatments have been proposed, however, evidence for effective clinical therapeutic options still remain scarce. Although it is described that RIF patients might eventually benefit most from a ‘keep calm and carry on’ approach, in practice patients often seek clearer answers on their pregnancy chance and request further investigations/interventions. It would be helpful to give patients insight in their chances of achieving pregnancy after RIF, but at this moment little is known about their prognosis. This is further complicated by the lack of consistency in the definition of RIF. Study design, size, duration A prospective cohort study on 42 RIF patients after one-year follow-up was performed, as part of the MURIM (Multidisciplinary Research on Repeated Implantation Failure and Recurrent Miscarriages) study. Baseline characteristics including an endometrial assessment and ReceptIVFity (vaginal microbiome) test were collected at the RIF outpatient clinic. After a follow-up duration of minimal one year participants were asked to complete a questionnaire regarding fertility treatment and pregnancy outcome. Missing information was received via medical files. Participants/materials, setting, methods RIF patients aged 18 to 38 years old visiting the RIF outpatient clinic at Maastricht University Medical Centre+ between April 2019 until September 2021 were included. RIF was defined as consecutive implantation failure of three high quality embryos or ten embryos without a quality criterion. Clinical characteristics, pregnancy outcome and time to pregnancy was analyzed by survival analysis and cox hazard regression analysis via SPSS version 20.0. A p-value of < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Main results and the role of chance Forty-two out of 44 contacted patients responded to the questionnaire (response rate = 95.5%). The ongoing pregnancy rate was 42.9% (Standard Deviation (SD): 0.50%) during the first year after visiting the RIF outpatient clinic. Mean time to ongoing pregnancy was 8.8 months (95%-CI: 7.5-10.1 months). The mean amount of embryo transfers (ETs) during this year was 2 (SD: 1.78). The ongoing pregnancy rate per ET (by survival analysis) for the first, third and sixth ET was 33.1%, 49.3% and 63.8%, respectively. To correct for a possible overestimation of the cumulative ongoing pregnancy rate per ET by normal survival analysis, pregnancy rates were calculated again using the number at risk of the total group during the first ET (pessimistic cumulative pregnancy rate). The pessimistic cumulative ongoing pregnancy rates were 33.1%, 42.9% and 48.6%, respectively. When comparing baseline characteristics by univariable cox hazard regression between women with and without ongoing pregnancy, no significant differences were found. Nineteen pregnancies were reported during the one-year follow-up, one conceived spontaneously (5.3%); four via fresh ET (IVF=15.8% and ICSI=5.3%); and 14 by frozen ET (IVF=26.4% and ICSI=47.4%). The pregnancies resulted in 14 livebirths (73.7%); one miscarriage (5.3%); one stillbirth (5.3%); and three ongoing pregnancies (15.8%). Limitations, reasons for caution Although this is the first study that prospectively describes pregnancy prognosis after RIF, it is limited by the short follow-up period and relatively small sample size. The RIF outpatient clinic consultation might have contributed to the obtained pregnancy results but the proportionality is unclear as there is no control group. Wider implications of the findings The obtained ongoing pregnancy prognosis after RIF is encouraging and justifies a conservative approach after three failed ETs. Furthermore, the high pregnancy rate indicates the need of well-defined, individualized diagnostic criteria to define RIF and to be able to deviate between couples with 'bad luck' and an underlying (treatable) cause. Trial registration number NL66835.068.18/METC18-040

STUDY QUESTION Is a single endometrial scratch prior to the second fresh IVF/ICSI treatment cost-effective compared to no scratch, when evaluated over a 12-month follow-up period? SUMMARY ANSWER The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for an endometrial scratch was euro6524 per additional live birth, but due to uncertainty regarding the increase in live birth rate this has to be interpreted with caution. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Endometrial scratching is thought to improve the chances of success in couples with previously failed embryo implantation in IVF/ICSI treatment. It has been widely implemented in daily practice, despite the lack of conclusive evidence of its effectiveness and without investigating whether scratching allows for a cost-effective method to reduce the number of IVF/ICSI cycles needed to achieve a live birth. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION This economic evaluation is based on a multicentre randomized controlled trial carried out in the Netherlands (SCRaTCH trial) that compared a single scratch prior to the second IVF/ICSI treatment with no scratch in couples with a failed full first IVF/ICSI cycle. Follow-up was 12 months after randomization. Economic evaluation was performed from a healthcare and societal perspective by taking both direct medical costs and lost productivity costs into account. It was performed for the primary outcome of biochemical pregnancy leading to live birth after 12 months of follow-up as well as the secondary outcome of live birth after the second fresh IVF/ICSI treatment (i.e. the first after randomization). To allow for worldwide interpretation of the data, cost level scenario analysis and sensitivity analysis was performed. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS From January 2016 until July 2018, 933 women with a failed first IVF/ICSI cycle were included in the trial. Data on treatment and pregnancy were recorded up until 12 months after randomization, and the resulting live birth outcomes (even if after 12 months) were also recorded. Total costs were calculated for the second fresh IVF/ICSI treatment and for the full 12 month period for each participant. We included costs of all treatments, medication, complications and lost productivity costs. Cost-effectiveness analysis was carried out by calculating ICERs for scratch compared to control. Bootstrap resampling was used to estimate the uncertainty around cost and effect differences and ICERs. In the sensitivity and scenario analyses, various unit costs for a single scratch were introduced, amongst them, unit costs as they apply for the United Kingdom (UK). MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE More live births occurred in the scratch group, but this also came with increased costs over a 12-month period. The estimated chance of a live birth after 12 months of follow-up was 44.1% in the scratch group compared to 39.3% in the control group (risk difference 4.8%, 95% CI -1.6% to +11.2%). The mean costs were on average euro283 (95% CI: -euro299 to euro810) higher in the scratch group so that the point average ICER was euro5846 per additional live birth. The ICER estimate was surrounded with a high level of uncertainty, as indicated by the fact that the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve (CEAC) showed that there is an 80% chance that endometrial scratching is cost-effective if society is willing to pay similar to euro17 500 for each additional live birth. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION There was a high uncertainty surrounding the effects, mainly in the clinical effect, i.e. the difference in the chance of live birth, which meant that a single straightforward conclusion could not be ascertained as for now. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS This is the first formal cost-effectiveness analysis of endometrial scratching in women undergoing IVF/ICSI treatment. The results presented in this manuscript cannot provide a clear-cut expenditure for one additional birth, but they do allow for estimating costs per additional live birth in different scenarios once the clinical effectiveness of scratching is known. As the SCRaTCH trial was the only trial with a follow-up of 12 months, it allows for the most complete estimation of costs to date. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) This study was funded by ZonMW, the Dutch organization for funding healthcare research. A.E.P.C., F.J.M.B., E.R.G. and C.B. L. reported having received fees or grants during, but outside of, this trial.

IntroductionWomen with repeated implantation failure (RIF) and unexplained recurrent miscarriage (RM) are proposed to be at opposite ends of the implantation spectrum, with RM representing an overly receptive endometrium (implantation of genetically aberrant or poor-quality embryos) versus RIF representing an overly selective endometrium (no implantation even with good quality embryos). In both cases, often no explanation for reproductive failure can be found and although promising add-on treatments have been introduced, therapeutic options are frequently limited to supportive care. Both RM and RIF are multifactorial and research indicates that the interplay between steroidogenesis, uterine natural killer (uNK) cells and the microbiome determine the capacity of the endometrium to be a biosensor for invading embryos. Our objective is to elucidate whether there is a difference in endometrial receptivity parameters (ie, steroid metabolism, uNK cells and the microbiome) between women aged 18–38 years with reproductive failure (RIF and RM), and fertile controls.Methods and analysisSingle-centre, observational cohort study. Endometrial biopsies, vaginal swabs and peripheral blood will be collected during the window of implantation and menstrual blood in the subsequent menstruation. The study parameters are the steroid profile (steroid levels and mRNA levels, protein expression and activity of steroid enzymes) in endometrial tissue and peripheral blood, as well as the activating or inhibitory phenotype of uNK cells based on receptor expression in menstrual blood and endometrial tissue and determination of the vaginal and endometrial microbiome using the inter spacer bacterial profiling technique.Ethics and disseminationThe protocol is approved by the local medical ethical review committee at the Maastricht University Medical Centre. Findings from this study will be shared with the academic and medical community and the patient organisations to optimise and individualise medical care of patients with implantation failure and miscarriages.Trial registration numberNTR7571, registered 28 February 2019.

Does the endometrial synthesis and inactivation of 17β- estradiol differ between receptive and non-receptive endometrium in women undergoing IVF/ICSI? The synthesis and inactivation of 17β-estradiol is similar in the endometrium of women who did and did not achieve a clinical pregnancy through IVF/ICSI. Implantation failure of high-quality embryos is a main concern in IVF/ICSI treatment. Blood sex-steroid concentrations do not reflect their corresponding concentrations in endometrial tissue. This is in line with the concept that blood steroids (and precursors) are locally converted to bioactive metabolites and vice versa, by expressing steroid-metabolising enzymes, such as 17β-hydroxy steroid dehydrogenase (17β-HSD). Studies indicate that alterations in intracrinology might modulate endometrial receptivity. We hypothesize that the local 17β-HSD activity during the window of implantation (WOI) differs between pregnant and non-pregnant IVF/ICSI patients. Case-control study of 40 patients that were recruited in the SCRaTCH study (NL5193/NTR5342), a randomised trial exploring whether ‘endometrial scratching’ in patients with a previous IVF/ICSI cycle failure affects pregnancy outcome in a subsequent IVF/ICSI cycle. For the present investigation, 20 endometrial biopsies from women who achieved clinical pregnancy after fresh embryo transfer (ET) were compared with 20 endometrial biopsies of women that did not conceive after fresh ET. Endometrial biopsies and serum were obtained at LH + 5-8 days (urinary test) in a natural cycle, prior to the fresh ET cycle. Cases (negative pregnancy test, n = 20) and controls (clinically pregnant, n = 20) were matched for primary vs. secondary infertility, embryo quality and age. Reduction of estrone to 17β-estradiol (synthesizing 17β-HSDs) and oxidation of 17β-estradiol to estrone (inactivating 17β-HSDs) were determined by high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). Results were compared with the Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney Rank Sum Test. Activity of 17β-HSDs responsible for the reduction of estrone to 17β-estradiol (mainly 17β-HSD type 1) was detected in all samples and ranged from 55 to 1864 pmol 17β-estradiol formed/mg protein/24 h. The values obtained from pregnant women (median: 1054) were not significantly different to those obtained from non-pregnant women (median: 997), p = 0.97. The activity of enzymes responsible for the oxidation of 17β-­ estradiol (mainly 17β-HSD type 2) into the less active estrone ranged from 32 to 1731 estrone formed/mg protein/24 h. The values obtained from pregnant women (median: 737) were not significantly different to those obtained from non-pregnant women (median: 624), p = 0.90. The ratio of 17β-HSD type 1:17β-HSD type 2 had a median of 1.63 in the pregnant woman compared to 1.95 in the group of non-pregnant woman (p = 0.57). The study is pilot in nature and study population is small. Primary and secondary infertility patients were analysed together. A chance phenomenon could have occurred as included women were included after their first IVF/ICSI cycle, hence not every included study person met the criteria for repeated implantation failure (RIF). 17β-estradiol metabolism takes place during the WOI, controlling the final 17β-estradiol level. Although the present investigation did not show differences between pregnant and non-pregnant women, it remains important to explore if estrogen balance deviations, e.g. in other cycle phases plays a role in clinical conditions such as primary infertility/RIF. NL5193/NTR5342

Abstract STUDY QUESTION Does endometrial scratching in women with one failed IVF/ICSI treatment affect the chance of a live birth of the subsequent fresh IVF/ICSI cycle? SUMMARY ANSWER In this study, 4.6% more live births were observed in the scratch group, with a likely certainty range between −0.7% and +9.9%. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Since the first suggestion that endometrial scratching might improve embryo implantation during IVF/ICSI, many clinical trials have been conducted. However, due to limitations in sample size and study quality, it remains unclear whether endometrial scratching improves IVF/ICSI outcomes. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION The SCRaTCH trial was a non-blinded randomised controlled trial in women with one unsuccessful IVF/ICSI cycle and assessed whether a single endometrial scratch using an endometrial biopsy catheter would lead to a higher live birth rate after the subsequent IVF/ICSI treatment compared to no scratch. The study took place in 8 academic and 24 general hospitals. Participants were randomised between January 2016 and July 2018 by a web-based randomisation programme. Secondary outcomes included cumulative 12-month ongoing pregnancy leading to live birth rate. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS Women with one previous failed IVF/ICSI treatment and planning a second fresh IVF/ICSI treatment were eligible. In total, 933 participants out of 1065 eligibles were included (participation rate 88%). MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE After the fresh transfer, 4.6% more live births were observed in the scratch compared to control group (110/465 versus 88/461, respectively, risk ratio (RR) 1.24 [95% CI 0.96–1.59]). These data are consistent with a true difference of between −0.7% and +9.9% (95% CI), indicating that while the largest proportion of the 95% CI is positive, scratching could have no or even a small negative effect. Biochemical pregnancy loss and miscarriage rate did not differ between the two groups: in the scratch group 27/153 biochemical pregnancy losses and 14/126 miscarriages occurred, while this was 19/130 and 17/111 for the control group (RR 1.21 (95% CI 0.71–2.07) and RR 0.73 (95% CI 0.38–1.40), respectively). After 12 months of follow-up, 5.1% more live births were observed in the scratch group (202/467 versus 178/466), of which the true difference most likely lies between −1.2% and +11.4% (95% CI). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION This study was not blinded. Knowledge of allocation may have been an incentive for participants allocated to the scratch group to continue treatment in situations where they may otherwise have cancelled or stopped. In addition, this study was powered to detect a difference in live birth rate of 9%. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS The results of this study are an incentive for further assessment of the efficacy and clinical implications of endometrial scratching. If a true effect exists, it may be smaller than previously anticipated or may be limited to specific groups of women undergoing IVF/ICSI. Studying this will require larger sample sizes, which will be provided by the ongoing international individual participant data-analysis (PROSPERO CRD42017079120). At present, endometrial scratching should not be performed outside of clinical trials. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) This study was funded by ZonMW, the Dutch organisation for funding healthcare research. J.S.E. Laven reports grants and personal fees from AnshLabs (Webster, Tx, USA), Ferring (Hoofddorp, The Netherlands) and Ministry of Health (CIBG, The Hague, The Netherlands) outside the submitted work. A.E.P. Cantineau reports ‘other’ from Ferring BV, personal fees from Up to date Hyperthecosis, ‘other’ from Theramex BV, outside the submitted work. E.R. Groenewoud reports grants from Titus Health Care during the conduct of the study. A.M. van Heusden reports personal fees from Merck Serono, personal fees from Ferring, personal fees from Goodlife, outside the submitted work. F.J.M. Broekmans reports personal fees as Member of the external advisory board for Ferring BV, The Netherlands, personal fees as Member of the external advisory board for Merck Serono, The Netherlands, personal fees as Member of the external advisory for Gedeon Richter, Belgium, personal fees from Educational activities for Ferring BV, The Netherlands, grants from Research support grant Merck Serono, grants from Research support grant Ferring, personal fees from Advisory and consultancy work Roche, outside the submitted work. C.B. Lambalk reports grants from Ferring, grants from Merck, grants from Guerbet, outside the submitted work. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER Registered in the Netherlands Trial Register (NL5193/NTR 5342). TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE 31 July 2015. DATE OF FIRST PATIENT’S ENROLMENT 26 January 2016.

The authors of the above article would like to apologise for errors in Figure 3 of their article. An old version of the figure file image was uploaded by the authors, with sub-sections A, B, C and D rearranged. The correct version of Figure 3 is included overpage. The electronic version of this article has been updated at https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dez065. The authors would liketo assure readers that this does not affect any content of the article. (Figure Presented).

The authors of the above article would like to apologise for errors in Figure 3 of their article. An old version of the figure file image was uploaded by the authors, with sub-sections A, B, C and D rearranged. The correct version of Figure 3 is included overpage. The electronic version of this article has been updated at https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dez065. The authors would liketo assure readers that this does not affect any content of the article. (Figure Presented).

The aim of this study was to test whether women who conceived after a period of subfertility are less likely to undergo invasive prenatal testing (IPT) and determine factors of influence in that decision. We conducted a retrospective study at the Maastricht University Medical Centre (MUMC+) to compare the rates of IPT following abnormal results of combined first trimester screening (cFTS) or second trimester screening (STS), or because of advanced maternal age among women tested for the effect of type and duration of subfertility and history of fertility investigations and/or treatment. We included 977 women who underwent IPT between January 2010 and December 2013. The women who conceived after fertility investigations and/or treatment had lower rates of IPT following abnormal STS (12.6% vs. 20.0%, OR = 0.58, 95% CI; 0.34-0.97). The difference was not statistically significant after correction for maternal age and severity of the foetal anomaly. Maternal age was, in contrast to fertility treatment or duration of subfertility, related to the choice of IPT among formerly subfertile women. Therefore, the lower uptake of IPT in women conceiving after a period of subfertility is dependent on the indication for IPT and maternal age and less on the type and duration of subfertility.

Background In the Netherlands, couples with unexplained infertility and a good prognosis to conceive spontaneously (i.e. Hunault > 30%) are advised to perform timed intercourse for at least another 6 months. If couples fail to conceive within this period, they will usually start assisted reproductive technology (ART). However, treatment of unexplained infertility by ART is empirical and can involve significant burdens. Intentional endometrial injury, also called ‘endometrial scratching’, has been proposed to positively affect the chance of embryo implantation in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF). It might also be beneficial for couples with unexplained infertility as defective endometrial receptivity may play a role in these women. The primary aim of this study is to determine whether endometrial scratching increases live birth rates in women with unexplained infertility. Method A multicentre randomized controlled trial will be conducted in Dutch academic and non-academic hospitals starting from November 2017. A total of 792 women with unexplained infertility and a good prognosis for spontaneous conception < 12 months (Hunault > 30%) will be included, of whom half will undergo endometrial scratching in the luteal phase of the natural cycle. The women in the control group will not undergo endometrial scratching. According to Dutch guidelines, both groups will subsequently perform timed intercourse for at least 6 months. The primary endpoint is cumulative live birth rate. Secondary endpoints are clinical and ongoing pregnancy rate; miscarriage rate; biochemical pregnancy loss; multiple pregnancy rate; time to pregnancy; progression to intrauterine insemination (IUI) or IVF; pregnancy complications; complications of endometrial scratching; costs and endometrial tissue parameters associated with reproductive success or failure. The follow-up duration is 12 months. Discussion Several small studies show a possible beneficial effect of endometrial scratching in women with unexplained infertility trying to conceive naturally or through IUI. However, the quality of this evidence is very low, making it unclear whether these women will truly benefit from this procedure. The SCRaTCH-OFO trial aims to investigate the effect of endometrial scratching on live birth rate in women with unexplained infertility and a good prognosis for spontaneous conception < 12 months. Trial registration NTR6687 , registered August 31st, 2017. Protocol version Version 2.6, November 14th, 2018.

Success rates of assisted reproductive techniques (ART) are approximately 30%, with the most important limiting factor being embryo implantation. Mechanical endometrial injury, also called ‘scratching’, has been proposed to positively affect the chance of implantation after embryo transfer, but the currently available evidence is not yet conclusive. The primary aim of this study is to determine the effect of endometrial scratching prior to a second fresh in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI) cycle on live birth rates in women with a failed first IVF/ICSI cycle.

Tubal patency tests are routinely performed in the diagnostic work-up of subfertile patients, but it is unknown whether these diagnostic tests add value beyond the information obtained by medical history taking and findings at physical examination. We used individual patient data meta-analysis to assess this question.We approached authors of primary studies for data sets containing information on patient characteristics and results from tubal patency tests, such as Chlamydia antibody test (CAT), hysterosalpingography (HSG) and laparoscopy. We used logistic regression to create models that predict tubal pathology from medical history and physical examination alone, as well as models in which the results of tubal patency tests are integrated in the patient characteristics model. Laparoscopy was considered to be the reference test.We obtained data from four studies reporting on 4883 women. The duration of subfertility, number of previous pregnancies and a history of previous pelvic inflammatory disease (PID), pelvic surgery or Chlamydia infection qualified for the patient characteristics model. This model showed an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) of 0.63 [95 confidence interval (CI) 0.610.65]. For any tubal pathology, the addition of HSG significantly improved the predictive performance to an AUC of 0.74 (95 CI 0.730.76) (P 0.001). For bilateral tubal pathology, the addition of both CAT and HSG increased the predictive performance to an AUC of 0.76 (95 CI 0.740.79).In the work-up for subfertile couples, the combination of patient characteristics with CAT and HSG results gives the best diagnostic performance for the diagnosis of bilateral tubal pathology.

BACKGROUND:Conventional meta-analysis has estimated the sensitivity and specificity of hysterosalpingography (HSG) to be 65% and 83%. The impact of patient characteristics on the accuracy of HSG is unknown. The aim of this study was to assess by individual patient data meta-analysis whether the accuracy of HSG is associated with different patient characteristics.METHODS:We approached authors of primary studies reporting on the accuracy of HSG using findings at laparoscopy as the reference. We assessed whether patient characteristics such as female age, duration of subfertility and a clinical history without risk factors for tubal pathology were associated with the accuracy of HSG, using a random intercept logistic regression model.RESULTS:We acquired data of seven primary studies containing data of 4521 women. Pooled sensitivity and specificity of HSG were 53% and 87% for any tubal pathology and 46% and 95% for bilateral tubal pathology. In women without risk factors, the sensitivity of HSG was 38% for any tubal pathology, compared with 61% in women with risk factors (P = 0.005). For bilateral tubal pathology, these rates were 13% versus 47% (P = 0.01). For bilateral tubal pathology, the sensitivity of HSG decreased with age [factor 0.93 per year (P = 0.05)]. The specificity of HSG was very stable across all subgroups.CONCLUSIONS:The accuracy of HSG in detecting tubal pathology was similar in all subgroups, except for women without risk factors in whom sensitivity was lower, possibly due to false-positive results at laparoscopy. HSG is a useful tubal patency screening test for all infertile couples.