Intrauterine insemination in natural cycle may give better results in older women

In: Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics · 2007 · vol. 24(2-3) , pp. 83–86 · doi:10.1007/s10815-006-9097-2 · PMID:17226077 · W2024226340
article OA: bronze CC0 ⤵ 1 in-corpus citation
AI-generated summary by claude@2026-07, 2026-07-29

In women over 37, natural cycle intrauterine insemination (IUI) showed significantly higher pregnancy and live-birth rates compared to IUI with controlled ovarian hyper-stimulation.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

BackgroundControlled ovarian hyper-stimulation (COH) in combination with intrauterine insemination (IUI) has been shown to result in significantly higher pregnancy rates compared to un-stimulated (natural cycle) IUI. This may however not be true in all ages.MethodsWe performed a retrospective cohort study and analysed data collected prospectively on 1759 IUI cycles in couples with unexplained infertility. The results were analysed to show the outcome of IUI with COH, and IUI in natural cycle (unstimulated), in younger women compared to their older counterparts.ResultsIn women age 37 and younger, COH resulted in a significantly higher pregnancy rate (13.0% vs 6.5%) and live-birth rate (10.7% vs 5.2%) compared to natural cycle IUI (p = 0.025, p = 0.045 respectively). However for older women age >37 years, natural cycle (unstimulated) IUI, resulted in a significantly higher pregnancy rate (12.0% vs 8.5%) live-birth rate (7.5%vs 3.5%) than IUI with COH ((p = 0.0037). This difference is even more significant when COH was performed with clomiphene citrate (7.5% vs 2.1%) (p = 0.0017).ConclusionCOH was associated with a lower live birth rate in older women, irrespective of the agent used, and it seems to be worse when the anti-oestrogenic drug clomiphene citrate was used for COH. Older women may benefit more from natural cycle (unstimulated) IUI. A randomised controlled trial is required to confirm this observation.
Full text 4,060 characters · extracted from oa-doi-fallback · 5 sections · click to expand

Abstract

Background: Controlled ovarian hyper-stimulation (COH) in combination with intrauterine insemination (IUI) has been shown to result in significantly higher pregnancy rates compared to un-stimulated (natural cycle) IUI [1]. This may however not be true in all ages.

Methods

We performed a retrospective cohort study and analysed data collected prospectively on 1759 IUI cycles in couples with unexplained infertility. The results were analysed to show the outcome of IUI with COH, and IUI in natural cycle (unstimulated), in younger women compared to their older counterparts.

Results

In women age 37 and younger, COH resulted in a significantly higher pregnancy rate (13.0% vs 6.5%) and live-birth rate (10.7% vs 5.2%) compared to natural cycle IUI (p = 0.025, p = 0.045 respectively). However for older women age >37 years, natural cycle (unstimulated) IUI, resulted in a significantly higher pregnancy rate (12.0% vs 8.5%) live-birth rate (7.5%vs 3.5%) than IUI with COH ((p = 0.0037). This difference is even more significant when COH was performed with clomiphene citrate (7.5% vs 2.1%) (p = 0.0017).

Conclusion

COH was associated with a lower live birth rate in older women, irrespective of the agent used, and it seems to be worse when the anti-oestrogenic drug clomiphene citrate was used for COH. Older women may benefit more from natural cycle (unstimulated) IUI. A randomised controlled trial is required to confirm this observation. Similar content being viewed by others

References

Guzick DS, Carson SA, Coutifaris C, Overstreet JW, Factor-Litvak P, Steinkampf MP, Hill JA, Mastroianni L, Buster JE, Nakajima ST, Vogel DL, Canfield RE. Efficacy of superovulation and intrauterine insemination in the treatment of infertility. N Engl J Med 1999;340:177–83 Cohlen BJ, Vandekerdkhove P, te Velde ER, Habbema JDF. Timed intercourse versus intrauterine insemination with or without ovarian hyperstimulation for subfertility in men. Cochrane Database Sys Rev 2000; (2):CD000360 NICE (National Institute for Clinical Excellence). Fertility: Assessment and treatment for people with fertility problems. Clinical guidelines published by RCOG press. RCOG, 2004:75–80 Paterson CM, Hatasaka HH, Jones KP, Poulson AM, Carrell DT. Ovulation induction with gonadotropins and intrauterine insemination compared with invitro-fertilisation and no therapy: A prospective, non-randomised, cohort study and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril 1994;62:535–44 Steures P, Van Der Steeg JW, Verhoeve HR, Van Dop PA, Hompes PGA, Bossuyt PMM, Van Der Veen F, Habbema JDF, Eijkemans MJC, Mol BWJ. Does ovarian hyperstimulation in intrauterine insemination for cervical factor subfertility improve pregnancy rates? Hum Reprod 2006;19:2263–6 Attaullah N, Proctor M, Johnson NP. Oral versus injectable ovulation induction agents for unexplained subfertility. Cochrane Database of Sys Rev 2002; (3):CD003052 Birkenfeld A, Beier HM, Schenker JG. The effect of clomiphene citrate on early embryonic development, endometrium and implantation. Hum Reprod, 1986;1:387–93 Laufer N, Prat BM, DeCherny AH, et al. The in-vivo and in-vitro effects of clomiphene citrate on ovulation, fertilisation and development of cultured mouse oocytes. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1983;147:633 Rogers PA, Polson D, Murphy CR et al., Correlation of endometrial histology, morphometry, and ultrasound appearance after different stimulation protocols for in-vitro fertilisation. Fertil Steril 1991;55:583–7 Gleicher N, Oleske DM, Tur-kaspa I, Vidali A, Karande V. Reducing the risk of higher order multiple pregnancy after ovarian stimulation with gonadotropins. N Engl J Med. 2000;1(343):2–7 Author information Authors and Affiliations Corresponding author Rights and permissions About this article Cite this article Kalu, E., Thum, M.Y. & Abdalla, H. Intrauterine insemination in natural cycle may give better results in older women. J Assist Reprod Genet 24, 83–86 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-006-9097-2 Received: Accepted: Published: Issue date: DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-006-9097-2

Text is read by the "Ask this paper" AI Q&A widget below. Extraction quality varies by source — PMC NXML preserves structure cleanly, OA-HTML may include some navigation residue, and OA-PDF can have broken hyphenation. The publisher copy (via DOI) is the canonical version.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Ask this paper AI returns verbatim quotes from the full text · source: oa-doi-fallback

Answers must be backed by verbatim quotes from this paper's full text. Hallucinated quotes are dropped automatically; if no verbatim passage answers the question, we say so. How this works

Citation neighborhood (sparse)

Too few in-corpus citations on either side for a chart; here are the lists.

Cites (1)

Cited by (1)

References (10)

Cited by (1)

Source provenance

openalex
last seen: 2026-05-14T06:08:44.784461+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK