SCIRP Mobile Website
Paper Submission

Why Us? >>

  • - Open Access
  • - Peer-reviewed
  • - Rapid publication
  • - Lifetime hosting
  • - Free indexing service
  • - Free promotion service
  • - More citations
  • - Search engine friendly

Free SCIRP Newsletters>>

Add your e-mail address to receive free newsletters from SCIRP.

 

Contact Us >>

WhatsApp  +86 18163351462(WhatsApp)
   
Paper Publishing WeChat
Book Publishing WeChat
(or Email:book@scirp.org)

Article citations

More>>

Von Horn, K., Depenbusch, M., Schultze-Mosgau, A. and Griesinger, G. (2017) Randomized, Open Trial Comparing a Modified Double-Lumen Needle Follicular Flushing System with a Single-Lumen Aspiration Needle in IVF Patients with Poor Ovarian Response. Human Reproduction, 32, 832-835.
https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dex019

has been cited by the following article:

  • TITLE: Double-Lumen Needle Follicular Flushing System versus Single-Lumen Aspiration Needle in IVF/ICSI Patients with Poor Ovarian Response: A Meta-Analysis

    AUTHORS: Weijie Xing, Jianping Ou, Liuhong Cai, Xin Tao

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

    JOURNAL NAME: Advances in Sexual Medicine, Vol.7 No.4, October 18, 2017

    ABSTRACT: 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.