{"paper_id":"dbcd0a81-3373-47cd-b759-0db2e34b5a31","body_text":"Abstract\nObjective\nThis study aimed to investigate the effect of ultrasound-diagnosed adenomyosis on assisted pregnancy outcomes, i.e., in vitro fertilization–embryo transfer (IVF–ET).\nMethods\nThis was a retrospective cohort study of 18,568 women who had received their first frozen–thawed ET cycle in Center of Reproductive Medicine, Children's Hospital of Shanxi and Women Health Center of Shanxi and the Reproductive Medicine Center of Tianjin Central Obstetrics and Gynecology Hospital from January 2014 to May 2019. A total of 5,087 patients met the inclusion and exclusion criteria, and they were divided into two groups: adenomyosis with tubal factor infertility (study group, n = 193) and only tubal factor infertility (control group, n = 4894). After a 1:1 propensity score match (caliper value = 0.005), 360 cases were matched in the end.\nResult\nThere was no statistical difference in the embryo implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rate, or multiple pregnancy rate between the two groups (28.4% vs. 31.7%, 42.2% vs. 42.8%, and 11.7% vs. 12.8%, respectively; P > 0.05). However, the early miscarriage rate in the adenomyosis group was significantly higher than that in the control group (13.3% vs. 5.6%, respectively; P = 0.012). The live birth rate was 22.8% in the women with adenomyosis and was observed to be significantly lower than 33.3% in the control group (P = 0.026). The patients with adenomyosis had a higher incidence of pregnancy complications than those without (4.4% vs. 0.6%, respectively; P = 0.018), but the neonatal birth weight was not related to adenomyosis.\nConclusion\nWomen with adenomyosis should be treated as being at high risk of early miscarriage. However, maternal adenomyosis has no effect on the birth weight of the newborn.\nSimilar content being viewed by others\nReferences\nFerenczy A (1998) Pathophysiology of adenomyosis. Hum Reprod Update 4(4):312–322. https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/4.4.312\nDevlieger R, D’Hooghe T, Timmerman D (2003) Uterine adenomyosis in the infertility clinic. Hum Reprod Update 9(2):139–147. https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmg010\nChapron C, Vannuccini S, Santulli P et al (2020) Diagnosing adenomyosis: an integrated clinical and imaging approach. Hum Reprod Update 26(3):392–411. https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmz049\nMeredith SM, Sanchez-Ramos L, Kaunitz AM (2009) Diagnostic accuracy of transvaginalsonography for the diagnosis of adenomyosis: systematic review and metaanalysis. Am J ObstetGynecol 201(1):107.e1-107.e1076. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2009.03.021\nYu O, Schulze-Rath R, Grafton J, Hansen K, Scholes D, Reed SD (2020) Adenomyosis incidence, prevalence and treatment: United States population-based study 2006–2015. Am J ObstetGynecol 223(1):94.e1-94.e10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2020.01.016\nGarcía-Solares J, Donnez J, Donnez O, Dolmans MM (2018) Pathogenesis of uterine adenomyosis: invagination or metaplasia? FertilSteril 109(3):371–379. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.12.030\nYounes G, Tulandi T (2017) Effects of adenomyosis on in vitro fertilization treatment outcomes: a meta-analysis. FertilSteril 108(3):483-490.e3. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.06.025\nVercellini P, Consonni D, Dridi D, Bracco B, Frattaruolo MP, Somigliana E (2014) Uterine adenomyosis and in vitro fertilization outcome: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod 29(5):964–977. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deu041\nNeal S, Morin S, Werner M et al (2020) Three-dimensional ultrasound diagnosis of adenomyosis is not associated with adverse pregnancy outcome following single thawed euploid blastocyst transfer: prospective cohort study. Ultrasound ObstetGynecol 56(4):611–617. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.22065\nCostello MF, Lindsay K, McNally G (2011) The effect of adenomyosis on in vitro fertilisation and intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection treatment outcome. Eur J ObstetGynecolReprodBiol 158(2):229–234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2011.04.030\nPuente JM, Fabris A, Patel J et al (2016) Adenomyosis in infertile women: prevalence and the role of 3D ultrasound as a marker of severity of the disease. ReprodBiolEndocrinol 14(1):60. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12958-016-0185-6\nMartínez-Conejero JA, Morgan M, Montesinos M et al (2011) Adenomyosis does not affect implantation, but is associated with miscarriage in patients undergoing oocyte donation. FertilSteril 96(4):943–950. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.07.1088\nBenaglia L, Cardellicchio L, Leonardi M et al (2014) Asymptomatic adenomyosis and embryo implantation in IVF cycles. Reprod Biomed Online 29(5):606–611. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2014.07.021\nThalluri V, Tremellen KP (2012) Ultrasound diagnosed adenomyosis has a negative impact on successful implantation following GnRH antagonist IVF treatment. Hum Reprod 27(12):3487–3492. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/des305\nSalim R, Riris S, Saab W, Abramov B, Khadum I, Serhal P (2012) Adenomyosis reduces pregnancy rates in infertile women undergoing IVF. Reprod Biomed Online 25(3):273–277. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2012.05.003\nMavrelos D, Holland TK, O’Donovan O et al (2017) The impact of adenomyosis on the outcome of IVF-embryo transfer. Reprod Biomed Online 35(5):549–554. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2017.06.026\nHorton J, Sterrenburg M, Lane S, Maheshwari A, Li TC, Cheong Y (2019) Reproductive, obstetric, and perinatal outcomes of women with adenomyosis and endometriosis: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update 25(5):592–632. https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmz012\nSharma S, Bathwal S, Agarwal N, Chattopadhyay R, Saha I, Chakravarty B (2019) Does presence of adenomyosis affect reproductive outcome in IVF cycles? A retrospective analysis of 973 patients. Reprod Biomed Online 38(1):13–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2018.09.014\nMaheshwari A, Gurunath S, Fatima F, Bhattacharya S (2012) Adenomyosis and subfertility: a systematic review of prevalence, diagnosis, treatment and fertility outcomes. Hum Reprod Update 18(4):374–392. https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dms006\nHashimoto A, Iriyama T, Sayama S et al (2018) Adenomyosis and adverse perinatal outcomes: increased risk of second trimester miscarriage, preeclampsia, and placental malposition. J MaternFetal Neonatal Med 31(3):364–369. https://doi.org/10.1080/14767058.2017.1285895\nScala C, Leone Roberti Maggiore U, Racca A et al (2018) Influence of adenomyosis on pregnancy and perinatal outcomes in women with endometriosis. Ultrasound ObstetGynecol 52(5):666–671. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.18989\nLiang Z, Yin M, Ma M, Wang Y, Kuang Y (2019) Effect of pretreatment with a levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine system on IVF and vitrified-warmed embryo transfer outcomes in women with adenomyosis. Reprod Biomed Online 39(1):111–118. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2019.03.101\nSaremi A, Bahrami H, Salehian P, Hakak N, Pooladi A (2014) Treatment of adenomyomectomy in women with severe uterine adenomyosis using a novel technique. Reprod Biomed Online 28(6):753–760. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2014.02.008\nWang S, Duan H, Zhou L et al (2014) Relationship between ultrastructural features of endometrial-myometrial interface and pathogenesis of adenomyosis. Zhonghua Yi XueZaZhi 94:2115–2118\nMaubon A, Faury A, Kapella M et al (2010) Uterine junctional zone at magnetic resonance imaging: a predictor of in vitro fertilization implantation failure. J ObstetGynaecol Res 36:611–618\nYang JH, Wu MY, Chang DY et al (2006) Increased interleukin-6 messenger RNA expression in macrophage co-cultured endometrial stromal cells in adenomyosis. Am J ReprodImmunol 55(3):181–187\nUlukus M, Ulukus EC, Seval Y et al (2006) Expression of interleukin-8 receptors in patients with adenomyosis. FertilSteril 85(3):714–720\nWang F, Li H, Yang Z et al (2009) Expression of interleukin-10 in patients with adenomyosis. FertilSteril 91(5):1681–1685\nLinan XU, Nan L, Tianzeng L et al (2012) Free radical generation induced epithelial-mesenchymal transition of endometrial epi- thelial cells contributes to adenomyosis via TGF-β1-dependent mechanism. Free Radical Biol Med 53:S209–S210\nStreuli I, Santulli P, Chouzenoux S et al (2015) Activation of the MAPK/ERK cell-signaling pathway in uterine smooth muscle cells of women with adenomyosis. ReprodSci 22:1549–1560\nOta H, Tanaka T (2003) Stromal vascularization in the endometrium during adenomyosis. Microsc Res Tech 60(4):445–449\nAuthor information\nAuthors and Affiliations\nContributions\nX-PZ and Y-FZ conceived the idea and conceptualized the study. RS and Y-JZ collected the data. X-LZ and X-MH analyzed the data. X-YH and Y-JH drafted the manuscript, then X-LZ and Y-JH reviewed the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final draft.\nCorresponding author\nEthics declarations\nConflict of interest\nThe authors declare that they have no competing interests.\nAdditional information\nPublisher's Note\nSpringer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.\nRights and permissions\nAbout this article\nCite this article\nZhang, XP., Zhang, YF., Shi, R. et al. Pregnancy outcomes of infertile women with ultrasound-diagnosed adenomyosis for in vitro fertilization and frozen–thawed embryo transfer. Arch Gynecol Obstet 304, 1089–1096 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-021-06011-z\nReceived:\nAccepted:\nPublished:\nVersion of record:\nIssue date:\nDOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-021-06011-z","source_license":"public-domain-us","license_restricted":false}