P-777 Can endometrial compaction predict live birth/ongoing pregnancy rates in assisted reproductive technology cycles? A systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract Study question Can endometrial compaction (EC) predict live birth/ongoing pregnancy rates (LBR/OPR) in assisted reproductive technology (ART) cycles? Summary answer Our meta-analysis shows that LBR/OPRs are similar cycles with or without EC. Analysis of studies euploid embryo transfers (ETs) also yield LBR/OPR. What is known already EC a novel concept, defined as change thickness (EMT) between the end follicular phase and ET day. Early implied can be predictor for improved ART. However, subsequent presented conflicting results. The role predicting ART success remains undetermined there paucity data whether subgroup women exists whom may predictive success. design, size, duration We performed systematic review reporting LBR/OP regard to Two independent authors searched electronic databases from date inception until January 29, 2023. Primary outcome was LBR/OPR per ET. Secondary outcomes were clinical (CP) miscarriage For dichotomous measures, Mantel-Haenszel risk ratios (RRs); 95% CIs presented. A fixed random effects model used based on heterogeneity data. Participants/materials, setting, methods Initial search yielded 4816 studies. After exclusion through titles, 81 assessed by reading their abstracts. Full text 22 evaluated. Finally, 16 involving total 13976 included meta-analysis. Included further scrutinized definitions EC, fresh frozen-thawed ET, preparation utilization preimplantation genetic diagnosis. Data primary secondary extracted two independently. Main results chance In our using cut-off value 5% EMT define [RR = 1.10, 95%CI 0.97 1.24; 11 studies, 6157 cycles]. When no implemented minimum changes taken into account each study, comparable showing not 1.04, 0.96 1.12; concordance, analysis six 2710 only 1.01, 0.90 1.12]. demonstrating when artificial hormonal analyzed 1.09, 1.21; 5811 Regarding parameters, EMT, 0.98, 1.07; 8 5578 cycles] 0.91, 0.69 1.19; 3413 no-compaction cycles. Limitations, reasons caution Around 3/4 retrospective. While most ≥ some 0% 10%. Moreover, “compaction” “no compaction” while others preferred “compaction”, “same” “expansion”. combined change” “expansion” groups ‘’non-compaction’’ group. Wider implications findings Once promising success, does seem helpful calculating obsolete. ETs imply embryo, determines outcome. Further preferably ETs, homogeneous definition needed. Trial registration number Not applicablez