-
Fertility and sterility · Apr 1993
Comparative StudyTransvaginal versus laparoscopic gamete intrafallopian transfer: a case-controlled retrospective comparison.
- R P Jansen and J C Anderson.
- Sydney IVF, New South Wales, Australia.
- Fertil. Steril. 1993 Apr 1; 59 (4): 836-40.
ObjectiveTo compare pregnancy rates (PRs) obtained by transvaginal ultrasound (US)-guided GIFT with PRs from conventional laparoscopy-based GIFT.DesignRetrospective case-controlled study.SettingLarge, private assisted conception service.PatientsTwenty consecutive cycles of transvaginal GIFT, each matched with three cycles of laparoscopic GIFT on the basis of patient age, number of previous unsuccessful attempts at GIFT, number of eggs transferred, and total number of eggs obtained.Main Outcome MeasureProbability of clinical pregnancy.ResultsThe PR from transvaginal GIFT was 20.0% (95% confidence limits 13% to 27%), compared with a PR from laparoscopic GIFT of 35.0% (23% to 50%).ConclusionTransvaginal GIFT with present techniques seems to be less effective than laparoscopic GIFT, but it can be considered as a practical alternative to ovarian stimulation and intrauterine insemination and to peritoneal ovum-sperm transfer.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*,_underline_or**bold**. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>and subscript<sub>text</sub>. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3., hyphens-or asterisks*. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com) - Images can be included with:
 - For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote..