Uterine position at real embryo transfer compared with mock embryo transfer
نویسندگان
چکیده
منابع مشابه
Comparison between Conventional Blind Embryo Transfer and Embryo Transfer Based on Previously Measured Uterine Length
متن کامل
the correlation between mock embryo transfers prior to the start of ivf cycle with real embryo transfer
background: it has been demonstrated that performing a mock embryo transfer (et) significantly improves the pregnancy rate in ivf cycles. the mock et could be performed prior to the stimulation cycle or immediately before real et. the problem of the first procedure is the possibility of variation in the uterine position and or cervico�uterine angle. objective: the purpose of this study was to d...
متن کاملcomparison between conventional blind embryo transfer and embryo transfer based on previously measured uterine length
0
متن کاملComparison between Conventional Blind Embryo Transfer and Embryo Transfer Based on Previously Measured Uterine Length
BACKGROUND Embryo transfer (ET) is one of the most important steps in assisted re- productive technology (ART) cycles and affected by many factors namely the depth of embryo deposition in uterus. In this study, the outcomes of intracytoplasmic sperm injec- tion (ICSI) cycles after blind embryo transfer and embryo transfer based on previously measured uterine length using vaginal ultrasound were...
متن کاملUterine peristalsis exerts control over fluid migration after mock embryo transfer.
STUDY QUESTION What is the effect of uterine peristalsis on fluid migration after mock embryo transfer? SUMMARY ANSWER Uterine peristaltic wave frequency was positively correlated with the distance that fluid moved after it was deposited in the uterine cavity. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Embryos have been found outside the uterine cavity after embryo transfer. It has been suggested that uterine c...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
ژورنال
عنوان ژورنال: Human Reproduction
سال: 2004
ISSN: 1460-2350
DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deh116