Author(s)

Weijie Xing^*, Jianping Ou, Liuhong Cai, Xin Tao

Center for Reproductive Medicine, The Third Affiliated Hospital of Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China.

Background: The present study performed a meta-analysis to comprehensively analyze existing randomized controlled trials (RCT) involving the use of double-lumen needle in patients with poor ovarian response to explore whether double-lumen needle was good for specific patients. Methods: The PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Library databases and two randomized controlled trials registration centers were thoroughly searched until April 2017. The clinical outcomes of IVF/ICSI cycles were compared between two groups with double-lumen needle and single-lumen needle. Results: Four RCT studies were included in this present meta-analysis. The oocytes yield was similar in two groups (OR 0.88, 95%CI 0.66 - 1.16; I² = 4%). The procedure time with double-lumen needle was significantly longer than that with single-lumen needle (IV = 1.98, 95%CI 0.95 - 3.00; I² = 86%). The fertilization rate with double-lumen needle was lower than that with single-lumen needle (OR 0.66, 95%CI 0.44 - 0.97; I² = 0%). There was no significant difference of live birth rate in two groups (OR 0.76, 95%CI 0.32 - 1.76; I² = 41%). Conclusion: Double-lumen needle could not benefit patients with a POR in terms of the number of oocytes retrieved, oocyte recovery rate, normal fertilization rate, clinical pregnancy rate, and live birth rate, compared with single-lumen needle.

Double-Lumen Needle, Single-Lumen Needle, Poor Ovarian Response

Xing, W. , Ou, J. , Cai, L. and Tao, X. (2017) Double-Lumen Needle Follicular Flushing System versus Single-Lumen Aspiration Needle in IVF/ICSI Patients with Poor Ovarian Response: A Meta-Analysis. Advances in Sexual Medicine, 7, 167-178. doi: 10.4236/asm.2017.74014.