Search

Objective: To evaluate whether physical function and quality of life was influenced by discharge on the same-day after a total laparoscopic hysterectomy., Design: Multicentre non-inferiority randomised controlled trial., Setting: Five teaching hospitals and two university hospitals in the Netherlands., Population: Patients undergoing laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign or premalignant disease., Methods: Following informed consent, participants were allocated 1:1 either to same-day discharge (SDD) or next-day discharge (NDD)., Main Outcome Measures: The primary outcome was physical function at 7 days after surgery measured by the Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Physical Function short Form 10A. Secondary outcomes were physical function and quality of life at 1 and 3 days and 6 weeks after surgery measured with PROMIS short Form 10A and the EuroQol questionnaire (EQ-5D-5L)., Results: Two hundred and five patients were included of whom 105 were allocated to SDD and 100 to NDD. Physical function 7 days after surgery was 35.95 in the SDD group and 35.63 in the control group (mean difference 0.32; 95% CI [0.07-0.57]). As the upper limit of the 95% CI does not exceed the non-inferiority margin of 4 points, non-inferiority of SDD could be demonstrated. No difference in physical function nor quality of life on Days 1 and 3 and 6 weeks could be found., Conclusion: This research demonstrates same-day discharge after laparoscopic hysterectomy is non-inferior to next day discharge in physical function 7 days after surgery., (© 2024 The Author(s). BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Importance: Endometriosis is an inflammatory disease, with different forms of expression and a variety of complaints. An endometrioma, an ovarian cyst with endometrium-like lining, is one of the most common expressions of abdominal endometriosis. These endometriomas can, in addition to medical treatment, be treated surgically. After surgery, hormonal therapy is still frequently used, for treatment of endometriosis in general and prevention of recurrence of endometriomas specifically. However, not all women want or can receive postoperative hormonal treatment. It is important for this group to know the risk of anatomical recurrence of ovarian endometrioma after surgery for an endometrioma., Objective: To determine the recurrence rate for surgically treated endometrioma, without postoperative hormonal treatment., Data Sources: We performed a systematic literature review and meta-analyses, according to the PRISMA guidelines. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library were searched until May 2023. The literature search was limited to women with endometrioma who received surgical treatment without postoperative hormonal treatment., Study Selection and Synthesis: A distinction was made in study design including randomised controlled trials, cohort and retrospective studies. For assessment of risk of bias, the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions and The Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies - of interventions assessment tool were used., Main Outcomes: Outcome measure included in this review is endometrioma recurrence., Results: We screened 5367 articles, of which ninety-seven articles were systematically reviewed and fifty-five included in this systematic review. Twelve of these were randomised controlled trials, eleven prospective cohort studies, and thirty-two retrospective studies. Nine randomised controlled trials (RCT's) were assigned as low risk of bias. For non-RCT's, only three studies had low risk of bias. Data of twenty-three studies were pooled in meta-analyses, performed for follow-up periods of 3, 6, 12 and 24 months. These studies showed a recurrence rate of 4%, 14%, 17% and 27% respectively., Conclusion: The meta-analysis, at 24 months after surgery the endometrioma recurrence rate showed a weighted average up to 27%., Relevance: With this study, we aimed to determine the recurrence rate of endometrioma after surgical treatment in women without postoperative hormonal treatment use. Recurrence rates were up to 27%., (Copyright © 2024. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Endometriosis is an estrogen-dependent chronic disease characterized by the presence of endometriumlike tissue outside the uterus and is often associated with symptoms, such as dysmenorrhea, dysuria, dyschezia, chronic pelvic pain, and infertility. Moreover, women diagnosed with endometriosis can report gastrointestinal symptoms, including bloating, constipation or diarrhea, and abdominal cramping, which can be associated with irritable bowel syndrome and can result in the misdiagnosis of endometriosis as irritable bowel syndrome at first. Treatment usually involves hormonal therapy, pain management, surgery, and/or assisted reproductive techniques in case of infertility. Nonetheless, these treatment methods can be insufficient for alleviating symptoms or can have unacceptable side effects, leading to noncompliance. Therefore, women often apply self-management strategies, including dietary interventions. One of the diets frequently suggested as a tool to manage endometriosis-related symptoms on social media and patient forums is a gluten-free diet. Although a gluten-free diet has been proven effective in managing nonceliac wheat sensitivity or celiac disease, its effectiveness in endometriosis remains uncertain. The Nurses' Health Study II found it unlikely that gluten intake was a strong factor in endometriosis etiology and symptomatology. To the best of our knowledge, the most frequently cited and sole published intervention study on the efficacy of a gluten-free diet for endometriosis has several important limiting factors, including the absence of a control group. In addition, gluten consumption is highly susceptible to a placebo effect and a nocebo effect, where women might experience symptom relief after eliminating gluten and return of symptoms after they consume gluten again, solely because they believe that gluten is bad for them. Despite the inverse association between body mass index and endometriosis and between a gluten-free diet and increased body mass index, this is an association, and no causality was proven. In addition, other factors should be taken into consideration. Of note, a gluten-free diet is expensive, has limited availability, and has a significant effect on quality of life. Moreover, without proper dietary guidance, it may adversely affect the gastrointestinal microbiome. Therefore, scientifically substantiated advice regarding the use of a gluten-free diet for endometriosis-related symptoms is currently not available, and a gluten-free diet should be discouraged unless there is an additional diagnosis of nonceliac wheat sensitivity or celiac disease., (© 2024 The Authors.)

Currently, the optimal treatment to increase the chance of pregnancy and live birth in patients with colorectal endometriosis and subfertility is unknown. Evidence suggests that that both surgery and in vitro fertilization (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) are effective in improving live birth rate (LBR) among these women. However, the available evidence is of low quality, reports highly heterogeneous results, lacks direct comparison between both treatment options and does not assess whether a combination strategy results in a higher LBR compared to IVF/ICSI-only treatment. Additionally, the optimal timing of surgery within the treatment trajectory remains unclear. The primary objective of the TOSCA study is to assess the effectiveness of surgical treatment (potentially combined with IVF/ICSI) compared to IVF/ICSI-only treatment to increase the chance of an ongoing pregnancy resulting in a live birth in patients with colorectal endometriosis and subfertility, measured by cumulative LBR. Secondary objectives are to assess and compare quality of life and cost-effectiveness in both groups. Patients will be followed for 40 months after inclusion or until live birth. The TOSCA study is expected to be completed in 6 years.

For patients with endometrioma it is unclear what treatment: surgery and/or medication, is more effective in reducing pain and improving quality of life (QoL). This systematic review and meta- analysis aimed to provide an overview of the existing evidence on the effects of surgery and/or medication (i.e. analgesics and/or hormonal medication) on pain and QoL. A search through CENTRAL, MEDLINE and Embase was conducted. The study population had to be women treated for endometrioma. Retrospective or prospective studies reporting about QoL and/or the following types of pain were reviewed: dysmenorrhea, dyspareunia, chronic pelvic pain, and pain that was not well defined in the included article (referred to as pain). We performed a meta-analysis on mean visual analogue scale (VAS) scores and proportions of patients experiencing different types of pain over time. QoL was described narratively. Out of 11.515 articles, 76 studies including 7148 patients were included for the systematic review. The meta-analysis consisted of 52 studies including 4556 patients. No studies compared medication with surgery. And there were no studies on analgesics. Meta-analysis showed that surgery and/or medication often reduced VAS scores and proportions of all types of pain over time. Surgery and medication combined seems more effective in reducing VAS scores of pain compared to surgery alone, but not to medication alone (estimated mean difference = 0.17, p < 0.0001 and -0.98, p = 0.0339). QoL improved after medication (follow up ≤ 12 months) and QoL was unchanged or worsened after surgery and medication combined (follow up ≤ 24 months). However, these were results from a total of 5 studies. Both surgery and medication reduce endometriosis-related pain in patients with endometrioma. However, there is lack of uniform, good quality data comparing surgery with medication to draw firm conclusions. For better-informed treatment decisions, further studies including a standardized core-outcome set at fixed follow-up times, are necessary., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objective: To evaluate the incidence, diagnostic management strategies and clinical outcomes of women with spontaneous haemoperitoneum in pregnancy (SHiP) and reassess the definition of SHiP., Design: A population-based cohort study using the Netherlands Obstetric Surveillance System (NethOSS)., Setting: Nationwide, the Netherlands., Population: All pregnant women between April 2016 and April 2018., Methods: This is a case study of SHiP using the monthly registry reports of NethOSS. Complete anonymised case files were obtained. A newly introduced online Delphi audit system (DAS) was used to evaluate each case, to make recommendations on improving the management of SHiP and to propose a new definition of SHiP., Main Outcome Measures: Incidence and outcomes, lessons learned about clinical management and the critical appraisal of the current definition of SHiP., Results: In total, 24 cases were reported. After a Delphi procedure, 14 cases were classified as SHiP. The nationwide incidence was 4.9 per 100 000 births. Endometriosis and conceiving after artificial reproductive techniques were identified as risk factors. No maternal and three perinatal deaths occurred. Based on the DAS, adequate imaging of free intra-abdominal fluid, and identifying and treating women with signs of hypovolemic shock could improve the early detection and management of SHiP. A revised definition of SHiP was proposed, excluding the need for surgical or radiological intervention., Conclusions: SHiP is a rare and easily misdiagnosed condition that is associated with high perinatal mortality. To improve care, better awareness among healthcare workers is needed. The DAS is a sufficient tool to audit maternal morbidity and mortality., (© 2023 The Authors. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Background: Sexual function after hysterectomy can be a concern for patients, and research remains inconclusive about changes in sexual function associated with hysterectomy., Aim: We meta-analyzed studies on change in sexual function from pre- to posthysterectomy and the role of total vs subtotal hysterectomy and concomitant bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (BSO) in differences in such change., Methods: We searched PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane databases from inception to January 2022. Two reviewers screened and included studies if they were published in a peer-reviewed journal and reported on sexual function pre- and posthysterectomy for benign nonprolapse indication. Methodological quality was assessed with the STROBE checklist. We used random effects multilevel models to meta-analyze standardized mean differences in pre- to postoperative sexual function and the posthysterectomy Female Sexual Function Index mean across study groups in R (RStudio)., Outcomes: Outcomes included overall sexual function, dyspareunia, desire, arousal, lubrication, and orgasm., Results: Thirty-two articles were analyzed: 8 randomized controlled trials, 20 prospective studies, 2 retrospective studies, 1 cross-sectional study, and 1 secondary analysis, comprising a total of 4054 patients. Each study provided data for at least 1 outcome. Study quality was moderate, and effect sizes showed large between-study heterogeneity. Hysterectomy was not associated with significant change in overall sexual function irrespective of surgical route, with patients tending to report potentially remaining sexual dysfunction posthysterectomy. Cervix removal was not significantly associated with differences in magnitude of change. Hysterectomy without BSO was associated with significantly stronger improvement in lubrication and orgasm than hysterectomy with BSO, which was not the case for desire, arousal or overall sexual function. However, these significant differences were not replicated within studies that directly compared cases with and without BSO., Clinical Implications: Clinicians should address remaining sexual dysfunction posthysterectomy, and BSO should not be considered if not medically required., Strengths and Limitations: We analyzed a comprehensive number of trials and studied clinically relevant factors that might relate to differences in change in sexual function. Conclusions need to be interpreted with caution since many studies showed moderate methodological quality and large effect size heterogeneity., Conclusion: Subtotal and total hysterectomy was not associated with significant change in overall sexual function irrespective of surgical route, with patients tending to report potentially remaining sexual dysfunction posthysterectomy. Hysterectomy without BSO was associated with significantly stronger improvement in lubrication and orgasm than hysterectomy with BSO. Future research on hysterectomy should analyze predictors of sexual function change trajectories, such as different indications., (© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of The International Society of Sexual Medicine.)

Objective: The objective of this study was to examine the hypothesis that experiences with patient-centered endometriosis care are related to the endometriosis-specific quality of life dimensions "emotional well-being" and "social support.", Design: A secondary regression analysis of two cross-sectional studies was conducted. Participants/Materials: In total, data from 300 women were eligible for analysis. The participating women all had surgically proven endometriosis., Setting: The study was conducted in one secondary and two tertiary endometriosis clinics in the Netherlands. Questionnaires were disseminated between 2011 and 2016., Methods: Both included studies investigated patient-centeredness of endometriosis care and endometriosis-specific quality of life using, respectively, the ENDOCARE questionnaire (ECQ) and the Endometriosis Health Profile 30 (EHP-30). To increase power, the regression analysis focused on the previously found relation between the ten dimensions of the ECQ and the EHP-30 domains "emotional well-being" and "social support" rather than all five EHP-30 domains. After the Bonferroni correction to limit type 1 errors, the adjusted p value was 0.003 (0.05/20)., Results: The participating women had a mean age of 35.7 years and had predominantly been diagnosed with moderate to severe endometriosis. None of the relations between patient-centered endometriosis care and the EHP-30 domain "emotional well-being" were significant. Three dimensions of patient-centered endometriosis care proved to be significantly related to the EHP-30 domain "social support": "information, communication, and education" (p &lt; 0.001, beta = 0.436), "coordination and integration of care" (p = 0.001, beta = 0.307), and "emotional support and alleviation of fear and anxiety" (p = 0.002, beta = 0.259)., Limitations: This cross-sectional study identified relations rather than proving causality between experiencing less patient-centeredness of care and having lower quality of life. Nevertheless, it is very tangible that some causality exists, either directly or indirectly (e.g., through empowerment) and that by improving patient-centeredness, quality of life might be improved as well., Conclusion: "Information, communication, and education"; "coordination and integration of care"; and "emotional support and alleviation of fear and anxiety" as dimensions of patient-centered endometriosis care are related to the quality of life domain "social support" of women with endometriosis. Improving the patient-centeredness of endometriosis care was already considered an important goal, but even more so given its relation with women's quality of life, which is increasingly considered the ultimate measure of health care quality. Quality improvement projects focusing on "information, communication, and education" are expected to impact women's quality of life the most., (© 2023 The Author(s). Published by S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Background: Endometrial ablation is a frequently performed treatment for heavy menstrual bleeding, but detailed information about recovery to help inform patients is lacking., Objective: To gain more insight into the short-term recovery after NovaSure® endometrial ablation, with the goal of improving preprocedural counselling., Materials and Methods: A total of 61 women who underwent endometrial ablation between March 2019 and November 2021 in a teaching hospital in the Netherlands were included in this prospective cohort study., Main Outcome Measures: Short-term recovery was investigated through questionnaires in the first week after the procedure. The primary outcome was the Recovery Index (RI-10). Secondary outcomes included health-related quality of life (EQ-5D-5L), pain intensity, use of analgesics, nausea, vaginal discharge, capability of performing activities (domestic chores, sports, work), self-rated health (EQ-VAS) and the feeling of full recovery., Results: A total of 33 women underwent the procedure under local anaesthesia and 28 women under procedural sedation. The RI-10 increased in the first week; median scores on day one, two and seven were 34 (IQR 28.5-41.5), 38.5 (IQR 31-47), and 42 (IQR 37.5-48), respectively. The median time for full recovery was five days. However, 23% of all women were not fully recovered within seven days. Women needed a median time of two days for returning to their work and 5.5 days for sporting activities. There were no differences in recovery between both anaesthesia techniques., Conclusions: Women undergoing endometrial ablation can be informed that most will fully recover within the first week of the procedure and that there is no difference in expected recovery time according to whether the procedure is undertaken with local anaesthesia or conscious sedation., What Is New?: The short-term recovery after endometrial ablation has been mapped in this trial. This information can be used in counselling women with heavy menstrual bleeding.

Study Question: For couples with unexplained subfertility and a poor prognosis for natural conception, is 6 months expectant management (EM) inferior to IUI with ovarian stimulation (IUI-OS), in terms of live births?, Summary Answer: In couples with unexplained subfertility and a poor prognosis for natural conception, 6 months of EM is inferior compared to IUI-OS in terms of live births., What Is Known Already: Couples with unexplained subfertility and a poor prognosis are often treated with IUI-OS. In couples with unexplained subfertility and a relatively good prognosis for natural conception (>30% in 12 months), IUI-OS does not increase the live birth rate as compared to 6 months of EM. However, in couples with a poor prognosis for natural conception (<30% in 12 months), the effectiveness of IUI-OS is uncertain., Study Design, Size, Duration: We performed a non-inferiority multicentre randomized controlled trial within the infrastructure of the Dutch Consortium for Healthcare Evaluation and Research in Obstetrics and Gynaecology. We intended to include 1091 couples within 3 years. The couples were allocated in a 1:1 ratio to 6 months EM or 6 months IUI-OS with either clomiphene citrate or gonadotrophins., Participants/materials, Setting, Methods: We studied heterosexual couples with unexplained subfertility and a poor prognosis for natural conception (<30% in 12 months). The primary outcome was ongoing pregnancy leading to a live birth. Non-inferiority would be shown if the lower limit of the one-sided 90% risk difference (RD) CI was less than minus 7% compared to an expected live birth rate of 30% following IUI-OS. We calculated RD, relative risks (RRs) with 90% CI and a corresponding hazard rate for live birth over time based on intention-to-treat and per-protocol (PP) analysis., Main Results and the Role of Chance: Between October 2016 and September 2020, we allocated 92 couples to EM and 86 to IUI-OS. The trial was halted pre-maturely owing to slow inclusion. Mean female age was 34 years, median duration of subfertility was 21 months. Couples allocated to EM had a lower live birth rate than couples allocated to IUI-OS (12/92 (13%) in the EM group versus 28/86 (33%) in the IUI-OS group; RR 0.40 90% CI 0.24 to 0.67). This corresponds to an absolute RD of minus 20%; 90% CI: -30% to -9%. The hazard ratio for live birth over time was 0.36 (95% CI 0.18 to 0.70). In the PP analysis, live births rates were 8 of 70 women (11%) in the EM group versus 26 of 73 women (36%) in the IUI-OS group (RR 0.32, 90% CI 0.18 to 0.59; RD -24%, 90% CI -36% to -13%) in line with inferiority of EM., Limitations, Reasons for Caution: Our trial did not reach the planned sample size, therefore the results are limited by the number of participants., Wider Implications of the Findings: This study confirms the results of a previous trial that in couples with unexplained subfertility and a poor prognosis for natural conception, EM is inferior to IUI-OS., Study Funding/competing Interest(s): The trial was supported by a grant of the SEENEZ healthcare initiative. The subsidizing parties were The Dutch Organisation for Health Research and Development (ZonMW 837004023, www.zonmw.nl) and the umbrella organization of 10 health insurers in The Netherlands. E.R.G. receives personal fees from Titus Health care outside the submitted work. M.G. declares unrestricted research and educational grants from Guerbet, Merck and Ferring not related to the presented work, paid to their institution VU medical centre. A.B.H. reports receiving travel and speakers fees from Nordic Pharma and Merck and he is member of the Nordic Pharma ANGEL group and of the Safety Monitoring Board of Womed. C.B.L. reports speakers fee from Inmed and Yingming, and his department receives research grants from Ferring, Merck and Guerbet paid to VU medical centre. B.W.J.M. is supported by a NHMRC Investigator grant (GNT1176437) and reports consultancy for ObsEva and Merck. M.v.W. received a grant from the Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development ZonMW (80-8520098-91072). F.M. received two grants from the Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development ZonMW (NTR 5599 and NTR 6590). The other authors report no competing interest., Trial Registration Number: Dutch Trial register NL5455 (NTR5599)., Trial Registration Date: 18 December 2015., Date of First Patient’s Enrolment: 26 January 2017., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology.)

Objective: To assess the influence of surgical approach, complications and patient characteristics and their postoperative functional outcomes on (sexual) quality of life (QoL) in patients with deep endometriosis (DE) with bowel involvement., Methods: Retrospective cohort study on patients surgically treated for DE in a Dutch tertiary referral hospital. Data are based on surgical records and questionnaires covering current postoperative bowel function and (sexual) QoL., Results: Postoperative functional score outcomes: constipation, fecal incontinence and Low Anterior Resection Syndrome (LARS) did not differ between patients treated with rectal shaving or segmental resection. Thirty percent of women treated with rectal shaving experienced LARS-like symptoms as well. Women who underwent segmental resection had a worse sexual QoL compared to patients managed by shaving. Patients who suffered from complications had a worse postoperative QoL. A higher postoperative constipation score was correlated with a significantly higher pain score and a lower overall and sexual QoL. LARS-score was correlated with a worsened sexual QoL., Conclusion: Women who underwent surgery for deep endometriosis rated their overall QoL as lower when a complication occurred. Segmental resection resulted in a lower sexual QoL compared to shaving. We showed that a higher LARS-score correlates with a lower sexual QOL, and postoperative constipation with more pain and a lower overall and sexual QoL. Interestingly, after using the shaving technique one-third of the patients experienced LARS-like symptoms as well.

Objective: To study the preferences of women with deep endometriosis (DE) with bowel involvement when they have to choose between conservative (medication) or surgical treatment., Design: Labelled discrete choice experiment (DCE)., Setting: Dutch academic and non-academic hospitals and online recruitment., Population or Sample: A total of 169 women diagnosed with DE of the bowel., Methods: Baseline characteristics and the fear of surgery were collected. Women were asked to rank attributes and choose between hypothetical conservative or surgical treatment in different choice sets (scenarios). Each choice set offered different levels of all treatment attributes. Data were analysed by using multinomial logistic regression., Main Outcome Measures: The following attributes - effect on/risk of pain, fatigue, pregnancy, endometriosis lesions, mood swings, osteoporosis, temporary stoma and permanent intestinal symptoms - were used in this DCE., Results: In the ranking, osteoporosis was ranked with low importance, whereas in the DCE, a lower chance of osteoporosis was one of the most important drivers when choosing a conservative treatment. Women with previous surgery showed less fear of surgery compared with women without surgery. Low anterior resection syndrome was almost equally important for patients as the chance of pain reduction. Pain reduction had higher importance than improving fertility chances, even in women with desire for a future child., Conclusions: The risk of developing low anterior resection syndrome as a result of treatment is almost equally important as the reduction of pain symptoms. Women with previous surgery experience less fear of surgery compared with women without a surgical history., Tweetable Abstract: First discrete choice experiment in patients with deep endometriosis., (© 2021 The Authors. BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.)

Objective: To evaluate the effect of an informative 360-degree virtual reality (VR) video on preoperative anxiety before visiting a one-stop clinic for abnormal uterine bleeding., Study Design: A randomized controlled trial was performed in a teaching hospital in the Netherlands. A total of 83 women scheduled for a first consultation at the one-stop clinic between April 2017 and September 2017 were included in the analysis. All women received a standard information leaflet about the clinic. 40 women were randomized to receive a 360-degree VR-video of the clinic in addition. The primary outcome was change in the Visual Analogue Scale for Anxiety (VAS-A), measured at baseline (before randomization) and in the waiting room (before visit, after randomization). Anxiety assessed with the State-Trait Anxiety Inventory (STAI-S) was a secondary outcome. Other secondary outcomes included anxiety during the visit and the opinion of the women about the provided information., Results: Only 27 out of the 40 women actually watched the VR-video. Women in the VR-group who actually watched the video reported lower levels of anxiety at baseline compared to women in the VR-group who did not watch the video. In the intention-to-treat analysis, there was no difference in change in anxiety between the VR-group and the control group (mean difference VAS-A = 0.07, 95% CI -0.96 to 1.10; mean difference STAI-S = 1.97, 95% CI -1.82 to 5.77). In the per-protocol analysis, women in the VR-group reported lower anxiety scores in the waiting room. However, the change in anxiety scores between baseline and waiting room was comparable in both groups. 31% of the women who watched the VR-video reported that the video resulted in a reduction of anxiety, 69% reported that the video is of added value and 65% would use a VR-video again in future., Conclusions: Adding the informative 360-degree VR-video to conventional information did not result in a reduction of anxiety prior to visiting the one-stop clinic. However, the majority of women who watched the video felt that it was of added value. Remarkable was that women who reported higher anxiety at baseline seemed less willing to watch the video., (Copyright © 2022 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Study Question: Is a single endometrial scratch prior to the second fresh IVF/ICSI treatment cost-effective compared to no scratch, when evaluated over a 12-month follow-up period?, Summary Answer: The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) for an endometrial scratch was €6524 per additional live birth, but due to uncertainty regarding the increase in live birth rate this has to be interpreted with caution., What Is Known Already: Endometrial scratching is thought to improve the chances of success in couples with previously failed embryo implantation in IVF/ICSI treatment. It has been widely implemented in daily practice, despite the lack of conclusive evidence of its effectiveness and without investigating whether scratching allows for a cost-effective method to reduce the number of IVF/ICSI cycles needed to achieve a live birth., Study Design, Size, Duration: This economic evaluation is based on a multicentre randomized controlled trial carried out in the Netherlands (SCRaTCH trial) that compared a single scratch prior to the second IVF/ICSI treatment with no scratch in couples with a failed full first IVF/ICSI cycle. Follow-up was 12 months after randomization.Economic evaluation was performed from a healthcare and societal perspective by taking both direct medical costs and lost productivity costs into account. It was performed for the primary outcome of biochemical pregnancy leading to live birth after 12 months of follow-up as well as the secondary outcome of live birth after the second fresh IVF/ICSI treatment (i.e. the first after randomization). To allow for worldwide interpretation of the data, cost level scenario analysis and sensitivity analysis was performed., Participants/materials, Setting, Methods: From January 2016 until July 2018, 933 women with a failed first IVF/ICSI cycle were included in the trial. Data on treatment and pregnancy were recorded up until 12 months after randomization, and the resulting live birth outcomes (even if after 12 months) were also recorded.Total costs were calculated for the second fresh IVF/ICSI treatment and for the full 12 month period for each participant. We included costs of all treatments, medication, complications and lost productivity costs. Cost-effectiveness analysis was carried out by calculating ICERs for scratch compared to control. Bootstrap resampling was used to estimate the uncertainty around cost and effect differences and ICERs. In the sensitivity and scenario analyses, various unit costs for a single scratch were introduced, amongst them, unit costs as they apply for the United Kingdom (UK)., Main Results and the Role of Chance: More live births occurred in the scratch group, but this also came with increased costs over a 12-month period. The estimated chance of a live birth after 12 months of follow-up was 44.1% in the scratch group compared to 39.3% in the control group (risk difference 4.8%, 95% CI -1.6% to +11.2%). The mean costs were on average €283 (95% CI: -€299 to €810) higher in the scratch group so that the point average ICER was €5846 per additional live birth. The ICER estimate was surrounded with a high level of uncertainty, as indicated by the fact that the cost-effectiveness acceptability curve (CEAC) showed that there is an 80% chance that endometrial scratching is cost-effective if society is willing to pay ∼€17 500 for each additional live birth., Limitations, Reasons for Caution: There was a high uncertainty surrounding the effects, mainly in the clinical effect, i.e. the difference in the chance of live birth, which meant that a single straightforward conclusion could not be ascertained as for now., Wider Implications of the Findings: This is the first formal cost-effectiveness analysis of endometrial scratching in women undergoing IVF/ICSI treatment. The results presented in this manuscript cannot provide a clear-cut expenditure for one additional birth, but they do allow for estimating costs per additional live birth in different scenarios once the clinical effectiveness of scratching is known. As the SCRaTCH trial was the only trial with a follow-up of 12 months, it allows for the most complete estimation of costs to date., Study Funding/competing Interest(s): This study was funded by ZonMW, the Dutch organization for funding healthcare research. A.E.P.C., F.J.M.B., E.R.G. and C.B. L. reported having received fees or grants during, but outside of, this trial., Trial Registration Number: Netherlands Trial Register (NL5193/NTR 5342)., (© The Author(s) 2021. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology.)

Research Question: How do infertility patients, endometriosis patients and health-care providers rate virtual care as an alternative to physical consultations during the first lockdown of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic in the Netherlands, and how does this influence quality of life and quality of care?, Design: Infertility patients and endometriosis patients from a university hospital and members of national patient organizations, as well as healthcare providers in infertility and endometriosis care, were asked to participate between May and October 2020. The distributed online questionnaires consisted of an appraisal of virtual care and an assessment of fertility-related quality of life (FertiQol) and patient-centredness of endometriosis care (ENDOCARE)., Results: Questionnaires were returned by 330 infertility patients, 181 endometriosis patients and 101 healthcare providers. Of these, 75.9% of infertility patients, 64.8% of endometriosis patients and 80% of healthcare providers rated telephone consultations as a good alternative to physical consultations during the COVID-19-pandemic. Only 21.3%, 14.8% and 19.2% of the three groups rated telephone consultations as a good replacement for physical consultations in the future. A total of 76.6% and 35.9% of the infertility and endometriosis patients reported increased levels of stress during the pandemic. Infertility patients scored lower on the FertiQol, while the ENDOCARE results care seem comparable to the reference population., Conclusions: Virtual care seems to be a good alternative for infertility and endometriosis patients in circumstances where physical consultations are not possible. Self-reported stress is especially high in infertility patients during the COVID-19-pandemic. Healthcare providers should aim to improve their patients' ability to cope., (Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Study Question: Does endometrial scratching in women with one failed IVF/ICSI treatment affect the chance of a live birth of the subsequent fresh IVF/ICSI cycle?, Summary Answer: In this study, 4.6% more live births were observed in the scratch group, with a likely certainty range between -0.7% and +9.9%., What Is Known Already: Since the first suggestion that endometrial scratching might improve embryo implantation during IVF/ICSI, many clinical trials have been conducted. However, due to limitations in sample size and study quality, it remains unclear whether endometrial scratching improves IVF/ICSI outcomes., Study Design, Size, Duration: The SCRaTCH trial was a non-blinded randomised controlled trial in women with one unsuccessful IVF/ICSI cycle and assessed whether a single endometrial scratch using an endometrial biopsy catheter would lead to a higher live birth rate after the subsequent IVF/ICSI treatment compared to no scratch. The study took place in 8 academic and 24 general hospitals. Participants were randomised between January 2016 and July 2018 by a web-based randomisation programme. Secondary outcomes included cumulative 12-month ongoing pregnancy leading to live birth rate., Participants/materials, Setting, Methods: Women with one previous failed IVF/ICSI treatment and planning a second fresh IVF/ICSI treatment were eligible. In total, 933 participants out of 1065 eligibles were included (participation rate 88%)., Main Results and the Role of Chance: After the fresh transfer, 4.6% more live births were observed in the scratch compared to control group (110/465 versus 88/461, respectively, risk ratio (RR) 1.24 [95% CI 0.96-1.59]). These data are consistent with a true difference of between -0.7% and +9.9% (95% CI), indicating that while the largest proportion of the 95% CI is positive, scratching could have no or even a small negative effect. Biochemical pregnancy loss and miscarriage rate did not differ between the two groups: in the scratch group 27/153 biochemical pregnancy losses and 14/126 miscarriages occurred, while this was 19/130 and 17/111 for the control group (RR 1.21 (95% CI 0.71-2.07) and RR 0.73 (95% CI 0.38-1.40), respectively). After 12 months of follow-up, 5.1% more live births were observed in the scratch group (202/467 versus 178/466), of which the true difference most likely lies between -1.2% and +11.4% (95% CI)., Limitations, Reasons for Caution: This study was not blinded. Knowledge of allocation may have been an incentive for participants allocated to the scratch group to continue treatment in situations where they may otherwise have cancelled or stopped. In addition, this study was powered to detect a difference in live birth rate of 9%., Wider Implications of the Findings: The results of this study are an incentive for further assessment of the efficacy and clinical implications of endometrial scratching. If a true effect exists, it may be smaller than previously anticipated or may be limited to specific groups of women undergoing IVF/ICSI. Studying this will require larger sample sizes, which will be provided by the ongoing international individual participant data-analysis (PROSPERO CRD42017079120). At present, endometrial scratching should not be performed outside of clinical trials., Study Funding/competing Interest(s): This study was funded by ZonMW, the Dutch organisation for funding healthcare research. J.S.E. Laven reports grants and personal fees from AnshLabs (Webster, Tx, USA), Ferring (Hoofddorp, The Netherlands) and Ministry of Health (CIBG, The Hague, The Netherlands) outside the submitted work. A.E.P. Cantineau reports 'other' from Ferring BV, personal fees from Up to date Hyperthecosis, 'other' from Theramex BV, outside the submitted work. E.R. Groenewoud reports grants from Titus Health Care during the conduct of the study. A.M. van Heusden reports personal fees from Merck Serono, personal fees from Ferring, personal fees from Goodlife, outside the submitted work. F.J.M. Broekmans reports personal fees as Member of the external advisory board for Ferring BV, The Netherlands, personal fees as Member of the external advisory board for Merck Serono, The Netherlands, personal fees as Member of the external advisory for Gedeon Richter, Belgium, personal fees from Educational activities for Ferring BV, The Netherlands, grants from Research support grant Merck Serono, grants from Research support grant Ferring, personal fees from Advisory and consultancy work Roche, outside the submitted work. C.B. Lambalk reports grants from Ferring, grants from Merck, grants from Guerbet, outside the submitted work., Trial Registration Number: Registered in the Netherlands Trial Register (NL5193/NTR 5342)., Trial Registration Date: 31 July 2015., Date of First Patient’s Enrolment: 26 January 2016., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology.)

Objective: Endometriosis is a chronic gynaecologic disease, causing pain and infertility. As there is no definitive cure, patients are subjected to long-term care. This study aimed to improve patient-centred endometriosis care. Patient-centredness of endometriosis care can be evaluated using the validated ENDOCARE questionnaire (ECQ), resulting in centre-specific targets for improvement. To understand how to tackle the targets for improvement as found by the ECQ, focus groups can be organized., Design: This protocol presents a prospective study with a mixed-methods approach to improve patient-centredness of endometriosis care. The study consists of 5 steps: (1) evaluating current patient-centredness of endometriosis care by using the ECQ, (2) understanding targets for improvement, (3) drafting an improvement plan, (4) implementing improvements, and (5) evaluating the improved patient-centredness of endometriosis care. The final evaluation will be performed 1.5 years after implementing the improvement plan., Methods: Patient-centredness will be evaluated using the ECQ by inviting women with endometriosis to participate (steps 1 and 5). To investigate step 2, focus groups will be organized. For these focus groups, women with endometriosis are asked to participate until data saturation is achieved. During focus groups, participants are motivated to discuss the found targets for improvement and stimulated to find ways to improve them. The drafting and implementing of the improvement plan (steps 3 and 4) will be organized with the help of health-care providers in close collaboration with the patient organization. To assess whether the implementation of the improvement plan was successful in improving endometriosis care, the results from the ECQ in step 5 will be compared to the results from the ECQ in step 1. Ethical approval was granted by the local Institutional Review Board (Ref 2018.438)., Setting: The study was conducted in the university hospital in the Netherlands., Limitations: Both patients and health-care providers will be involved in drafting the improvement plan. By making the health-care providers responsible for improving care, the chance of succeeding is optimized. Whether this improvement strategy is successful will be investigated after the implementation of the improvement plan. The improvement plan is clinic specific and can possibly not be extrapolated to other endometriosis clinics. In order to aim to improve patient-centred endometriosis care elsewhere, the complete study protocol should be performed., Conclusions: This study protocol aimed to investigate focus groups as a strategy to identify possible interventions to improve patient-centred endometriosis care by investigating the underlying causes for poor performance on patient-centred care. This study protocol could be used in more endometriosis care centres in the future and might also be useful for improving patient-centredness in other chronic diseases., (© 2021 The Author(s). Published by S. Karger AG, Basel.)

Introduction: Endometriosis is a benign gynecological disease with a high disease burden and significant, multifaceted impact on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and sexual quality of life (SQoL)., Aim: To explore which patient- and disease-specific characteristics were independently associated with SQoL., Methods: A literature search was carried out to identify characteristics with an evidence-based or hypothesized effect on SQoL. Subsequently, data on HRQoL in women with endometriosis (n = 224), collected between 2013 and 2018 in a prospective longitudinal Dutch cohort study performed in 7 referral centers, were used to perform a cross-sectional cohort study. Data were collected using an online self-administered survey including the validated Endometriosis Health Profile-30. Inclusion criteria were recently diagnosed endometriosis patients or newly referred patients with a clinical diagnosis of endometriosis. Patients were excluded in case of incomplete answers on the SQoL questions. Univariate analyses and multiple linear regression analyses were performed., Outcomes: SQoL, measured by the 5-item "sexual intercourse" dimension score of the modular Endometriosis Health Profile-30 questionnaire, was the primary outcome with scores ranging from 0 to 100 (0 indicating the best and 100 indicating the worst health status)., Results: Based on a literature search, 29 characteristics potentially associated with SQoL were selected from the survey and included in the analyses. In total, 192 women (mean age 36 years) met the inclusion criteria. The majority of women (86.5%) had had intercourse in the period before completing the survey and the study population showed a mean SQoL score of 47.5 ± 29.6, indicating moderate SQoL. Worse SQoL was independently associated with dyspareunia (P < .001), worse HRQoL (P = .001), severity of dysmenorrhea (P = .017), and unemployed work status (P = .022)., Conclusion: In a cohort of women with endometriosis, worse SQoL was significantly and independently associated with the presence of dyspareunia, more severe dysmenorrhea, worse HRQoL, and unemployed work status. van Poll M, van Barneveld E, Aerts L, et al. Endometriosis and Sexual Quality of Life. Sex Med 2020;8:532-544., (Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: All patients undergoing a laparoscopic hysterectomy receive an indwelling catheter during surgery. The optimum timing of removal of the catheter is uncertain. A possible advantage of leaving the catheter in up to 12 h after surgery is to reduce the risk of urinary retention. Possible disadvantages are patient discomfort and increased risk of urinary tract infection. Timing of removal of the catheter after laparoscopic hysterectomy has not been studied. Previous studies have assessed timing of catheter removal after abdominal hysterectomy. In these studies immediate removal seems safe and feasible after an uncomplicated hysterectomy. In 2015 immediate catheter removal after an uncomplicated hysterectomy was introduced in our clinic. We performed a retrospective analysis of all patients who underwent a laparoscopic hysterectomy. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the rate of urinary retentions and the secondary objective was to investigate the rate of urinary tract infections when the indwelling catheter was removed immediate after surgery., Study Design: We included all women who underwent a laparoscopic hysterectomy from April 2015 until December 2017. Informed consent was obtained from all patients. Medical records were analysed to identify baseline characteristics, surgical details and complications. General practitioners of the included patients were contacted to check for post-operative urinary tract infection up to 6 weeks after surgery., Results: 325 patients underwent an uncomplicated hysterectomy between April 2015 and December 2017. After informed consent we ultimately included 242 cases in our analysis. The mean age of our study population was 50 years. In 194 (802 %) patients the catheter was removed immediately after surgery. Main reason for delayed removal of the catheter was resection of deep endometriosis (n = 21). The incidence of urinary retention was 4,6 % (95 % CI 2,3-8,3 %) in the immediate removal group. In these 9 cases, 5 (2,6 %) where solved after single catheterisation. The remaining 4 patients (2,0 %) had an indwelling catheter for 24 h after which the urinary retention resolved. The incidence of urinary tract infection was 9,3 % (95 % CI 5,8-14,0- %), when the catheter was removed immediately after surgery. The incidence of urinary retention and UTI were respectively 2,1% (95 % CI 0,1-9,8%) and 208 % (95 % CI 11,1-34,0 %) in the cases with delayed catheter removal (N = 48)., Conclusion: Immediate removal of the urine catheter after uncomplicated hysterectomy is safe and results in low levels of urinary retention., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Objectives: Research about sexual function after hysterectomy is inconclusive. Possible predictive factors for sexual (dys)function are yet to be identified. The aim of this study is to assess the effect of hysterectomy on sexual function in women 3 and 12 months after hysterectomy for benign indications. Furthermore hypothesized predictive factors will be evaluated., Study Design: A prospective multicentre cohort study with follow-up at 3 and 12 months after hysterectomy was performed. To assess sexual function a short-form FSFI was used, a score ≤ 19 means sexual dysfunction). Linear mixed model repeated measure analysis was used to assess changes in sexual function in women who were sexually active at all three measure points (N = 260). Linear mixed model analyses were also used for the predictor analyses., Results: The FSFI score increased from 20.94 at baseline to 23.81 at 12 months post hysterectomy. The number of women experiencing sexual dysfunction was 86 (33.1 %). Women without preoperative sexual dysfunction had a significantly higher FSFI score 4.5 (95 % CI 3.5-5.6) one year after the operation than women indicating sexual dysfunction before surgery. Women who were living alone had a significantly higher FSFI score of 2.31 (0.7-4.0) when compared to women who were married or living together., Conclusion: FSFI score increases significantly after hysterectomy, which indicates a better sexual function after the operation. Sexual dysfunction before hysterectomy (FSFI score ≤ 19) and being married or living together are predictive factors for a lower FSFI score post hysterectomy., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier B.V.)

Study Questions: The objective of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of surgical treatment of women suffering from pain due to an ovarian endometrioma when compared to treatment with medication (analgesia and/or hormones). The primary outcome is defined as successful pain reduction (-30% reduction of pain) measured by the numeric rating scale (NRS) after 6 months. Secondary outcomes include successful pain reduction after 12 and 18 months, quality of life, affective symptoms, cost-effectiveness, recurrence rate, need of adjuvant medication after surgery, ovarian reserve, adjuvant surgery and budget impact., What Is Known Already: Evidence suggests that both medication and surgical treatment of an ovarian endometrioma are effective in reducing pain and improving quality of life. However, there are no randomised studies that compare surgery to treatment with medication., Study Design Size Duration: This study will be performed in a research network of university and teaching hospitals in the Netherlands. A multicentre randomised controlled trial and parallel prospective cohort study in patients with an ovarian endometrioma, with the exclusion of patients with deep endometriosis, will be conducted. After obtaining informed consent, eligible patients will be randomly allocated to either treatment arm (medication or surgery) by using web-based block randomisation stratified per centre. A successful pain reduction is set at a 30% decrease on the NRS at 6 months after randomisation. Based on a power of 80% and an alpha of 5% and using a continuity correction, a sample size of 69 patients in each treatment arm is needed. Accounting for a drop-out rate of 25% (i.e. loss to follow up), we need to include 92 patients in each treatment arm, i.e. 184 in total. Simultaneously, a cohort study will be performed for eligible patients who are not willing to be randomised because of a distinct preference for one of the two treatment arms. We intend to include 100 women in each treatment arm to enable standardization by inverse probability weighting, which means 200 patients in total. The expected inclusion period is 24 months with a follow-up of 18 months., Participants/materials Setting Methods: Premenopausal women (age ≥ 18 years) with pain (dysmenorrhoea, pelvic pain or dyspareunia) and an ovarian endometrioma (cyst diameter ≥ 3 cm) who visit the outpatient clinic will make up the study population. Patients with signs of deep endometriosis will be excluded. The primary outcome is successful pain reduction, which is defined as a 30% decrease of pain on the NRS at 6 months after randomisation. Secondary outcomes include successful pain reduction after 12 and 18 months, quality of life and affective symptoms, cost-effectiveness (from a healthcare and societal perspective), number of participants needing additional surgery, need of adjuvant medication after surgery, ovarian reserve and recurrence rate of endometriomas. Measurements will be performed at baseline, 6 weeks and 6, 12 and 18 months after randomisation., Study Funding/competing Interests: This study is funded by ZonMw, a Dutch organization for Health Research and Development, project number 80-85200-98-91041. The Department of Reproductive Medicine of the Amsterdam UMC location VUmc has received several research and educational grants from Guerbet, Merck KGaA and Ferring not related to the submitted work. B.W.J. Mol is supported by a NHMRC Practitioner Fellowship (GNT1082548) and reports consultancy for ObsEva, Merck KGaA and Guerbet. V. Mijatovic reports grants from Guerbet, grants from Merck and grants from Ferring outside the submitted work. All authors declare that they have no competing interests concerning this publication., Trial Registration Number: Dutch Trial Register (NTR 7447, http://www.trialregister.nl)., Trial Registration Date: 2 January 2019., Date of First Patient’s Enrolment: First inclusion in randomised controlled trial October 4, 2019. First inclusion in cohort May 22, 2019., (© The Author(s) 2020. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology.)

Objective: To evaluate age-dependent productivity loss caused by menstruation-related symptoms, measured in absenteeism (time away from work or school) and presenteeism (productivity loss while present at work or school)., Methods: Design/setting: internet-based, cross-sectional survey conducted in the Netherlands from July to October 2017., Participants: 32 748 women aged 15-45 years, recruited through social media., Outcome Measures: self-reported lost productivity in days, divided into absenteeism and presenteeism; impact of menstrual symptoms; reasons women give when calling in sick; and women's preferences regarding the implications of menstruation-related symptoms for schools and workplaces., Results: A total of 13.8% (n=4514) of all women reported absenteeism during their menstrual periods with 3.4% (n=1108) reporting absenteeism every or almost every menstrual cycle. The mean absenteeism related to a woman's period was 1.3 days per year. A total of 80.7% (n=26 438) of the respondents reported presenteeism and decreased productivity a mean of 23.2 days per year. An average productivity loss of 33% resulted in a mean of 8.9 days of total lost productivity per year due to presenteeism. Women under 21 years were more likely to report absenteeism due to menstruation-related symptoms (OR 3.3, 95% CI 3.1 to 3.6). When women called in sick due to their periods, only 20.1% (n=908) told their employer or school that their absence was due to menstrual complaints. Notably, 67.7% (n=22 154) of the participants wished they had greater flexibility in their tasks and working hours at work or school during their periods., Conclusions: Menstruation-related symptoms cause a great deal of lost productivity, and presenteeism is a bigger contributor to this than absenteeism. There is an urgent need for more focus on the impact of these symptoms, especially in women aged under 21 years, for discussions of treatment options with women of all ages and, ideally, more flexibility for women who work or go to school., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2019. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Background: In the Netherlands, couples with unexplained infertility and a good prognosis to conceive spontaneously (i.e. Hunault > 30%) are advised to perform timed intercourse for at least another 6 months. If couples fail to conceive within this period, they will usually start assisted reproductive technology (ART). However, treatment of unexplained infertility by ART is empirical and can involve significant burdens. Intentional endometrial injury, also called 'endometrial scratching', has been proposed to positively affect the chance of embryo implantation in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF). It might also be beneficial for couples with unexplained infertility as defective endometrial receptivity may play a role in these women. The primary aim of this study is to determine whether endometrial scratching increases live birth rates in women with unexplained infertility., Method: A multicentre randomized controlled trial will be conducted in Dutch academic and non-academic hospitals starting from November 2017. A total of 792 women with unexplained infertility and a good prognosis for spontaneous conception < 12 months (Hunault > 30%) will be included, of whom half will undergo endometrial scratching in the luteal phase of the natural cycle. The women in the control group will not undergo endometrial scratching. According to Dutch guidelines, both groups will subsequently perform timed intercourse for at least 6 months. The primary endpoint is cumulative live birth rate. Secondary endpoints are clinical and ongoing pregnancy rate; miscarriage rate; biochemical pregnancy loss; multiple pregnancy rate; time to pregnancy; progression to intrauterine insemination (IUI) or IVF; pregnancy complications; complications of endometrial scratching; costs and endometrial tissue parameters associated with reproductive success or failure. The follow-up duration is 12 months., Discussion: Several small studies show a possible beneficial effect of endometrial scratching in women with unexplained infertility trying to conceive naturally or through IUI. However, the quality of this evidence is very low, making it unclear whether these women will truly benefit from this procedure. The SCRaTCH-OFO trial aims to investigate the effect of endometrial scratching on live birth rate in women with unexplained infertility and a good prognosis for spontaneous conception < 12 months., Trial Registration: NTR6687 , registered August 31st, 2017., Protocol Version: Version 2.6, November 14th, 2018.

Objective: To evaluate the multivariate embryo selection model by van Loendersloot et al. (2014) (VL) in a different geographical context., Design: This is a retrospective external validation study of a 5-year cohort of women undergoing in vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmatic sperm injection., Setting: Two outpatient fertility clinics., Patient(s): A total of 1,197 women who underwent 1,610 fresh in vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmatic sperm injection cycles with single embryo transfer were included., Intervention(s): None., Main Outcome Measure(s): The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve for diagnostic efficacy was used to assess the discriminative value of the model. Calibration for testing the validity of the VL model was performed using the Hosmer-Lemeshow goodness-of-fit test and a calibration plot., Result(s): Three hundred thirty-three patients (21%) achieved a viable pregnancy of at least 11 weeks. The area under the receiver operating characteristics curve using the VL model was 0.68. No significant difference between the predicted implantation rate and the observed implantation rates was showed using the Hosmer-Lemeshow (X 2 = 6.70). The calibration plot showed an intercept of the regression line of 0.34 and the estimated slope was 0.72., Conclusion: The investigated VL model was able to distinguish between higher and lower implantation potential of embryos in our clinical setting., (Copyright © 2018 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Success rates of assisted reproductive techniques (ART) are approximately 30%, with the most important limiting factor being embryo implantation. Mechanical endometrial injury, also called 'scratching', has been proposed to positively affect the chance of implantation after embryo transfer, but the currently available evidence is not yet conclusive. The primary aim of this study is to determine the effect of endometrial scratching prior to a second fresh in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI) cycle on live birth rates in women with a failed first IVF/ICSI cycle., Method: Multicenter randomized controlled trial in Dutch academic and non-academic hospitals. A total of 900 women will be included of whom half will undergo an endometrial scratch in the luteal phase of the cycle prior to controlled ovarian hyperstimulation using an endometrial biopsy catheter. The primary endpoint is the live birth rate after the 2 nd fresh IVF/ICSI cycle. Secondary endpoints are costs, cumulative live birth rate (after the full 2 nd IVF/ICSI cycle and over 12 months of follow-up); clinical and ongoing pregnancy rate; multiple pregnancy rate; miscarriage rate and endometrial tissue parameters associated with implantation failure., Discussion: Multiple studies have been performed to investigate the effect of endometrial scratching on live birth rates in women undergoing IVF/ICSI cycles. Due to heterogeneity in both the method and population being scratched, it remains unclear which group of women will benefit from the procedure. The SCRaTCH trial proposed here aims to investigate the effect of endometrial scratching prior to controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in a large group of women undergoing a second IVF/ICSI cycle., Trial Registration: NTR 5342 , registered July 31 st , 2015., Protocol Version: Version 4.10, January 4th, 2017.

Study Question: Are there treatment selection markers that could aid in identifying couples, with unexplained or mild male subfertility, who would have better chances of a healthy child with IVF with single embryo transfer (IVF-SET) than with IUI with ovarian stimulation (IUI-OS)?, Summary Answer: We did not find any treatment selection markers that were associated with better chances of a healthy child with IVF-SET instead of IUI-OS in couples with unexplained or mild male subfertility., What Is Known Already: A recent trial, comparing IVF-SET to IUI-OS, found no evidence of a difference between live birth rates and multiple pregnancy rates. It was suggested that IUI-OS should remain the first-line treatment instead of IVF-SET in couples with unexplained or mild male subfertility and female age between 18 and 38 years. The question remains whether there are some couples that may have higher pregnancy chances if treated with IVF-SET instead of IUI., Study Design, Size, Duration: We performed our analyses on data from the INeS trial, where couples with unexplained or mild male subfertility and an unfavourable prognosis for natural conception were randomly allocated to IVF-SET, IVF in a modified natural cycle or IUI-OS. In view of the aim of this study, we only used data of the comparison between IVF-SET (201 couples) and IUI-OS (207 couples)., Participants/materials, Setting, Methods: We pre-defined the following baseline characteristics as potential treatment selection markers: female age, ethnicity, smoking status, type of subfertility (primary/secondary), duration of subfertility, BMI, pre-wash total motile count and Hunault prediction score. For each potential treatment selection marker, we explored the association with the chances of a healthy child after IVF-SET and IUI-OS and tested if there was an interaction with treatment. Given the exploratory nature of our analysis, we used a P-value of 0.1., Main Results and the Role of Chance: None of the markers were associated with higher chances of a healthy child from IVF-SET compared to IUI-OS (P-value for interaction >0.10)., Limitations, Reasons for Caution: Since this is the first large study that looked at potential treatment selection markers for IVF-SET compared to IUI-OS, we had no data on which to base a power calculation. The sample size was limited, making it difficult to detect any smaller associations., Wider Implications of the Findings: We could not identify couples with unexplained or mild male subfertility who would have had higher chances of a healthy child from immediate IVF-SET than from IUI-OS. As in the original trial IUI-OS had similar effectiveness and was less costly compared to IVF-SET, IUI-OS should remain the preferred first-line treatment in these couples., Study Funding/competing Interest(s): The study was supported by a grant from the Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development, and a grant from the Netherlands' association of health care insurers. There are no conflicts of interest., Trial Registration Number: The trial was registered at the Dutch trial registry (NTR939)., (© The Author 2017. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com)

Background: Pain can interfere with office procedures in gynaecology. The aim of this study is to measure the positive effect of music in gynaecological office procedures., Methods: A randomized controlled trial was performed between October 2014 and January 2016. Women scheduled for an office hysteroscopy or colposcopy were eligible for randomization in the music group or control group. Stratification for hysteroscopy and colposcopy took place. The primary outcome is patients' level of pain during the procedure measured by the visual analogue scale (VAS). Secondary outcomes include patients' level of pain after the procedure, anxiety and satisfaction of patient and doctor., Results: No positive effect of music on patients' perception of pain during the procedure was measured, neither for the hysteroscopy group (57 mm vs. 52 mm) nor for the colposcopy group (32 mm vs. 32 mm). Secondary outcomes were also similar for both groups., Conclusions: This study showed no positive effect of music on patients' level of pain, anxiety or satisfaction of patient or doctor for office hysteroscopy and colposcopy. We believe a multimodal approach has to be used to decrease patient distress in terms of pain and anxiety, with or without music., Trial Registration: Dutch Trial Register, NTR4924.