Impact of a Previous CS on the Ongoing Pregnancy Rate in Single Euploid Frozen Embryo Transfer (ET)
NCT ID: NCT05798624
Last Updated: 2024-07-17
Study Results
The study team has not published outcome measurements, participant flow, or safety data for this trial yet. Check back later for updates.
Basic Information
Get a concise snapshot of the trial, including recruitment status, study phase, enrollment targets, and key timeline milestones.
RECRUITING
1050 participants
OBSERVATIONAL
2023-05-01
2025-07-30
Brief Summary
Review the sponsor-provided synopsis that highlights what the study is about and why it is being conducted.
Related Clinical Trials
Explore similar clinical trials based on study characteristics and research focus.
Site of Embryo Transfer in Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection
NCT05004922
The Accuracy of Endometrial Ultrasound to Predict Implantation
NCT03860636
Uterine Lesions and Their Association to Invitro Fertilization(IVF) or Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection(ICSI) Outcome
NCT04939376
Comparative Study to Assess the Ongoing Pregnancy Rate for Poor Responders Women Undergoing Different Embryo Transfer Protocols
NCT05014867
Comparison of Transfers of Fresh and Thawed Embryos in Patients With Prior Failed Embryo Transfer Cycles
NCT00736177
Detailed Description
Dive into the extended narrative that explains the scientific background, objectives, and procedures in greater depth.
A case control study evaluated whether there are any differences in the location and distance to the internal cervical ostium of the implantation site of the intrauterine gestation sacs, early pregnancy symptoms and pregnancy outcome at 12 weeks gestation between women with and without a previous Caesarean section (CS) in patients who conceived naturally (Naji et al., 2013). Investigators concluded that the presence of a CS scar affects the site of implantation, and also that the distance between implantation site and the scar is related to the risk of spontaneous abortion.
This is a purely observational study without any intervention. Participants will be stratified into different groups according to their previous obstetrical history. Total sample size will include 1050 participants undergoing a frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycle.
Isthmocele will be defined according to de Vaate et al (Bij de Vaate et al., 2011) as: visible anechogenic area of at least 1 mm depth at the site of the Cesarean scar.
Conditions
See the medical conditions and disease areas that this research is targeting or investigating.
Study Design
Understand how the trial is structured, including allocation methods, masking strategies, primary purpose, and other design elements.
OTHER
PROSPECTIVE
Study Groups
Review each arm or cohort in the study, along with the interventions and objectives associated with them.
One CS with isthmocele
Ultrasound between 6+0 and 6+7 weeks of pregnancy - With Isthmocele
Location of implantation of the GS (gestational sac) amended to Naji et al, defined as 3 possible implantation sites: (A: fundal, B: anterior, C: posterior)
Size of isthmocele:
* Depth of isthmocele
* Width of isthmocele
* Circumference of isthmocele
Distance between isthmocele and outer cervical os (measured with the trace line) Distance between CS scar and outer cervical os (measured with the trace line) Size of gestational sac Measurements of the isthmocele size / circumference / distance between isthmocele / CS and outer cervical os
More than one CS with Isthmocele
Ultrasound between 6+0 and 6+7 weeks of pregnancy - With Isthmocele
Location of implantation of the GS (gestational sac) amended to Naji et al, defined as 3 possible implantation sites: (A: fundal, B: anterior, C: posterior)
Size of isthmocele:
* Depth of isthmocele
* Width of isthmocele
* Circumference of isthmocele
Distance between isthmocele and outer cervical os (measured with the trace line) Distance between CS scar and outer cervical os (measured with the trace line) Size of gestational sac Measurements of the isthmocele size / circumference / distance between isthmocele / CS and outer cervical os
One or more CS without isthmocele
Ultrasound between 6+0 and 6+7 weeks of pregnancy - Without Isthmocele
Location of implantation of the GS amended to Naji et al, defined as 3 possible implantation sites: (A: fundal, B: anterior, C: posterior) Distance between CS scar and outer cervical os (measured with the trace line) Size of gestational sac
With previous vaginal delivery
Ultrasound between 6+0 and 6+7 weeks of pregnancy
Location of implantation of the GS (gestational sac) amended to Naji et al, defined as 3 possible implantation sites (A: fundal, B: anterior, C: posterior)
Size of gestational sac
With first ongoing pregnancy
Ultrasound between 6+0 and 6+7 weeks of pregnancy
Location of implantation of the GS (gestational sac) amended to Naji et al, defined as 3 possible implantation sites (A: fundal, B: anterior, C: posterior)
Size of gestational sac
Interventions
Learn about the drugs, procedures, or behavioral strategies being tested and how they are applied within this trial.
Ultrasound between 6+0 and 6+7 weeks of pregnancy - With Isthmocele
Location of implantation of the GS (gestational sac) amended to Naji et al, defined as 3 possible implantation sites: (A: fundal, B: anterior, C: posterior)
Size of isthmocele:
* Depth of isthmocele
* Width of isthmocele
* Circumference of isthmocele
Distance between isthmocele and outer cervical os (measured with the trace line) Distance between CS scar and outer cervical os (measured with the trace line) Size of gestational sac Measurements of the isthmocele size / circumference / distance between isthmocele / CS and outer cervical os
Ultrasound between 6+0 and 6+7 weeks of pregnancy - Without Isthmocele
Location of implantation of the GS amended to Naji et al, defined as 3 possible implantation sites: (A: fundal, B: anterior, C: posterior) Distance between CS scar and outer cervical os (measured with the trace line) Size of gestational sac
Ultrasound between 6+0 and 6+7 weeks of pregnancy
Location of implantation of the GS (gestational sac) amended to Naji et al, defined as 3 possible implantation sites (A: fundal, B: anterior, C: posterior)
Size of gestational sac
Eligibility Criteria
Check the participation requirements, including inclusion and exclusion rules, age limits, and whether healthy volunteers are accepted.
Inclusion Criteria
Exclusion Criteria
* Known anomaly of the uterus or the adnexae (e.g.: fibroids, polyps, hydrosalpinx, endometriosis, adenomyosis)
* Embryo which was biopsied on day 7
* Poor quality embryo which was transferred (Gardner criteria: AC / BC / CB, biopsied on day 6 and CC embryos from both, day 5 and day 6 biopsies, classified as "poor" quality embryos)
* History of recurrent abortion
* Antiphospholipid syndrome / autoimmune diseases
18 Years
42 Years
FEMALE
No
Sponsors
Meet the organizations funding or collaborating on the study and learn about their roles.
ART Fertility Clinics LLC
OTHER
Responsible Party
Identify the individual or organization who holds primary responsibility for the study information submitted to regulators.
Barbara Lawrenz
Scientific Director
Principal Investigators
Learn about the lead researchers overseeing the trial and their institutional affiliations.
Barbara Lawrenz, PhD
Role: PRINCIPAL_INVESTIGATOR
ART Fertility Clinics LLC
Locations
Explore where the study is taking place and check the recruitment status at each participating site.
ART Fertility Clinics LLC
Abu Dhabi, , United Arab Emirates
Countries
Review the countries where the study has at least one active or historical site.
Central Contacts
Reach out to these primary contacts for questions about participation or study logistics.
Facility Contacts
Find local site contact details for specific facilities participating in the trial.
References
Explore related publications, articles, or registry entries linked to this study.
Betran AP, Ye J, Moller AB, Souza JP, Zhang J. Trends and projections of caesarean section rates: global and regional estimates. BMJ Glob Health. 2021 Jun;6(6):e005671. doi: 10.1136/bmjgh-2021-005671.
Bij de Vaate AJ, Brolmann HA, van der Voet LF, van der Slikke JW, Veersema S, Huirne JA. Ultrasound evaluation of the Cesarean scar: relation between a niche and postmenstrual spotting. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2011 Jan;37(1):93-9. doi: 10.1002/uog.8864.
Diao J, Gao G, Zhang Y, Wang X, Zhang Y, Han Y, Du A, Luo H. Caesarean section defects may affect pregnancy outcomes after in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer: a retrospective study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2021 Jul 6;21(1):487. doi: 10.1186/s12884-021-03955-7.
Evers EC, McDermott KC, Blomquist JL, Handa VL. Mode of delivery and subsequent fertility. Hum Reprod. 2014 Nov;29(11):2569-74. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deu197. Epub 2014 Aug 27.
Friedenthal J, Alkon-Meadows T, Hernandez-Nieto C, Gounko D, Lee JA, Copperman A, Buyuk E. The association between prior cesarean delivery and subsequent in vitro fertilization outcomes in women undergoing autologous, frozen-thawed single euploid embryo transfer. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2021 Sep;225(3):287.e1-287.e8. doi: 10.1016/j.ajog.2021.03.026. Epub 2021 Mar 30.
Gurol-Urganci I, Bou-Antoun S, Lim CP, Cromwell DA, Mahmood TA, Templeton A, van der Meulen JH. Impact of Caesarean section on subsequent fertility: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod. 2013 Jul;28(7):1943-52. doi: 10.1093/humrep/det130. Epub 2013 May 3.
Gurol-Urganci I, Cromwell DA, Mahmood TA, van der Meulen JH, Templeton A. A population-based cohort study of the effect of Caesarean section on subsequent fertility. Hum Reprod. 2014 Jun;29(6):1320-6. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deu057. Epub 2014 Apr 29.
Lawrenz B, Melado L, Garrido N, Coughlan C, Markova D, Fatemi H. Isthmocele and ovarian stimulation for IVF: considerations for a reproductive medicine specialist. Hum Reprod. 2020 Jan 1;35(1):89-99. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dez241.
Naji O, Wynants L, Smith A, Abdallah Y, Saso S, Stalder C, Van Huffel S, Ghaem-Maghami S, Van Calster B, Timmerman D, Bourne T. Does the presence of a Caesarean section scar affect implantation site and early pregnancy outcome in women attending an early pregnancy assessment unit? Hum Reprod. 2013 Jun;28(6):1489-96. doi: 10.1093/humrep/det110. Epub 2013 Apr 12.
Patounakis G, Ozcan MC, Chason RJ, Norian JM, Payson M, DeCherney AH, Yauger BJ. Impact of a prior cesarean delivery on embryo transfer: a prospective study. Fertil Steril. 2016 Aug;106(2):311-6. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.03.045. Epub 2016 Apr 14.
Sandall J, Tribe RM, Avery L, Mola G, Visser GH, Homer CS, Gibbons D, Kelly NM, Kennedy HP, Kidanto H, Taylor P, Temmerman M. Short-term and long-term effects of caesarean section on the health of women and children. Lancet. 2018 Oct 13;392(10155):1349-1357. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(18)31930-5.
van den Tweel MM, Klijn NF, Diaz de Pool JDN, van der Westerlaken LAJ, Louwe LA. Previous caesarean section is associated with lower subsequent in vitro fertilization live birth rates. Hum Fertil (Camb). 2022 Feb;25(1):93-98. doi: 10.1080/14647273.2019.1696990. Epub 2019 Dec 3.
Vissers J, Sluckin TC, van Driel-Delprat CCR, Schats R, Groot CJM, Lambalk CB, Twisk JWR, Huirne JAF. Reduced pregnancy and live birth rates after in vitro fertilization in women with previous Caesarean section: a retrospective cohort study. Hum Reprod. 2020 Mar 27;35(3):595-604. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dez295.
Wang L, Yao W, Tang X, Yao H, Wei S, Huang J, Mol BWJ, Jin L, Yue J, Wang R. Fertility outcomes of IVF/ICSI after Caesarean section: a cohort study. Reprod Biomed Online. 2020 May;40(5):719-728. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2019.12.004. Epub 2019 Dec 16.
Other Identifiers
Review additional registry numbers or institutional identifiers associated with this trial.
2303-ABU-003-BL
Identifier Type: -
Identifier Source: org_study_id
More Related Trials
Additional clinical trials that may be relevant based on similarity analysis.