Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection Versus Conventional In-Vitro Fertilisation for Couples with Infertility with Non-Severe Male Factor: a Multicentre, Open-Label, Randomised Controlled Trial
Yuanyuan Wang,Rong Li,Rui Yang,Danni Zheng,Lin Zeng,Ying Lian,Yimin Zhu,Junli Zhao,Xiaoyan Liang,Wen Li,Jianqiao Liu,Li Tang,Yunxia Cao,Guimin Hao,Huichun Wang,Hua Zhang,Rui Wang,Ben W. Mol,Hefeng Huang,Jie Qiao
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/s0140-6736(23)02416-9
IF: 202.731
2024-01-01
The Lancet
Abstract:Background Introduced in 1992, intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) was initially indicated for severe male infertility; however, its use has since been expanded to non -severe male infertility. We aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of ICSI versus conventional in -vitro fertilisation (IVF) in couples with infertility with non -severe male factor. Methods We conducted an investigator -initiated, multicentre, open -label, randomised controlled trial in ten reproductive medicine centres across China. Couples with infertility with non -severe male factor without a history of poor fertilisation were randomly assigned (1:1) to undergo either ICSI or conventional IVF. The primary outcome was live birth after first embryo transfer. We performed the primary analysis in the intention -to -treat population using log -binomial regression models for categorical outcomes or linear regression models for continuous outcomes, adjusting for centre. This trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03298633, and is completed. Findings Between April 4, 2018, and Nov 15, 2021, 3879 couples were screened, of whom 2387 (61 center dot 5%) couples were randomly assigned (1184 [49 center dot 6%] to the ICSI group and 1203 [50 center dot 4%] to the conventional IVF group). After excluding couples who were ineligible, randomised twice, or withdrew consent, 1154 (97 center dot 5%) in the ICSI group and 1175 (97 center dot 7%) in the conventional IVF group were included in the primary analysis. Live birth after first embryo transfer occurred in 390 (33 center dot 8%) couples in the ICSI group and in 430 (36 center dot 6%) couples in the conventional IVF group (adjusted risk ratio [RR] 0 center dot 92 [95% CI 0 center dot 83-1 center dot 03]; p=0 center dot 16). Two (0 center dot 2%) neonatal deaths were reported in the ICSI group and one (0 center dot 1%) in the conventional IVF group. Interpretation In couples with infertility with non -severe male factor, ICSI did not improve live birth rate compared with conventional IVF. Given that ICSI is an invasive procedure associated with additional costs and potential increased risks to offspring health, routine use is not recommended in this population.