Higher clinical pregnancy rate with in-vitro fertilization versus intracytoplasmic sperm injection in treatment of non-male factor infertility: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Abstract

ObjectiveTo evaluate the evidence about in-vitro fertilization (IVF) versus intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) for the treatment of non-male factor infertility. Data sourcesElectronic databases searched using the following MeSH terms (Sperm Injection, Intracytoplasmic) AND (in Vitro Fertilisation) AND (Infertility). Methods of study selectionAll RCTs included infertile patients due to non-male factors underwent IVF or ICSI were considered for this meta-analysis. One-thousand twenty-two studies were identified of which 20 studies deemed eligible for this review. Data extractionThree independent authors extracted the relevant data from included studies. The study outcomes were pooled in the form of relative risk (RR) and 95 % confidence interval (CI) using Mantel-Hansel method. The main outcome measures are the fertilization rate, the implantation rate, the clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), the total fertilization failure and the live birth rate. ResultsRegarding the fertilization rate, the pooled estimate did not favour either IVF or ICSI group (RR = 0.94; 95 %CI [0.82, 1.07]; p = 0.34). However, IVF significantly increased the CPR than ICSI (RR = 1.28, 95 %CI [1.11, 1.49]; p = 0.001). The overall effect estimate did not favor either of two groups regarding the implantation rate (RR = 1.25, 95 % CI [0.92, 1.68], p = 0.15). Similarly, no difference between both groups regarding the live birth rate (RR = 1.08, 95 % CI [0.79, 1.49]; p = 0.62). ConclusionsNo difference between ICSI and IVF regarding fertilization rate per oocytes, implantation rate and live birth rate in the treatment of non-male factor infertility, while IVF has significantly higher clinical pregnancy rate and higher risk of total fertilization failure.