The AID study: protocol for a randomised controlled trial of intrauterine insemination in the natural cycle compared with intracervical insemination in the natural cycle

Introduction At present, studies comparing intrauterine insemination in the natural cycle versus intracervical insemination in the natural cycle in women undergoing artificial insemination with donor sperm are scarce.Methods and analysis We perform a randomised controlled non-inferiority trial among...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Sjoerd Repping, Ben Willem Mol, Petronella Kop, Rob Bernardus, Michael De Brucker, Pim Janssens, Ben Cohlen, Jacqueline Pieters, Fulco van der Veen, Monique H Mochtar
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: BMJ Publishing Group 2019-07-01
Series:BMJ Open
Online Access:https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/9/7/e026065.full
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1846150386750062592
author Sjoerd Repping
Ben Willem Mol
Petronella Kop
Rob Bernardus
Michael De Brucker
Pim Janssens
Ben Cohlen
Jacqueline Pieters
Fulco van der Veen
Monique H Mochtar
author_facet Sjoerd Repping
Ben Willem Mol
Petronella Kop
Rob Bernardus
Michael De Brucker
Pim Janssens
Ben Cohlen
Jacqueline Pieters
Fulco van der Veen
Monique H Mochtar
author_sort Sjoerd Repping
collection DOAJ
description Introduction At present, studies comparing intrauterine insemination in the natural cycle versus intracervical insemination in the natural cycle in women undergoing artificial insemination with donor sperm are scarce.Methods and analysis We perform a randomised controlled non-inferiority trial among five secondary and tertiary fertility clinics in the Netherlands and one tertiary fertility clinic in Belgium. Women eligible for artificial insemination with donor sperm are included. We perform six cycles of artificial insemination with donor sperm within a time horizon of 8 months comparing intrauterine insemination in the natural cycle with intracervical insemination in the natural cycle. The primary outcome is ongoing pregnancy leading to live birth conceived within eight months after randomisation. Secondary outcomes are clinical pregnancy rate, miscarriage rate, multiple pregnancy rate, pregnancy complications (preterm birth, birth weight <2500 g, pregnancy induced hypertension, (pre-) eclampsia, Hemolysis Elevated Liver enzymes Low Platelets (HELLP)), time to ongoing pregnancy, direct and indirect costs. To demonstrate the non-inferiority of intracervical insemination with a margin of 12%, we need 208 women per arm.Ethics and dissemination The study has been approved by the Medical Ethical Committee of the Academic Medical Centre and from the Dutch Central Committee on research involving human subjects (47330-018-13). The boards of the participating hospitals approved the study. Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and presentations at international scientific meetings.Trial registration number NTR4462
format Article
id doaj-art-4d2ecc68fbd342b393b64785490359e6
institution Kabale University
issn 2044-6055
language English
publishDate 2019-07-01
publisher BMJ Publishing Group
record_format Article
series BMJ Open
spelling doaj-art-4d2ecc68fbd342b393b64785490359e62024-11-29T00:10:07ZengBMJ Publishing GroupBMJ Open2044-60552019-07-019710.1136/bmjopen-2018-026065The AID study: protocol for a randomised controlled trial of intrauterine insemination in the natural cycle compared with intracervical insemination in the natural cycleSjoerd Repping0Ben Willem Mol1Petronella Kop2Rob Bernardus3Michael De Brucker4Pim Janssens5Ben Cohlen6Jacqueline Pieters7Fulco van der Veen8Monique H Mochtar9Department of Health Evaluation and Appropriate Use, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands24 Robinson Institute, School of Paediatrics and Reproductive Health, The University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia1 Center for Reproductive Medicine, Amsterdam Reproduction & Development Institute, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, Netherlands4 Fertility clinic, Nij Barrahus, Wolvega, Netherlands5 Centre for Reproductive Medicine, Universitair Ziekenhuis Brussel, Brussel, Belgium6 Clinical Chemistry and Haematology, Hospital Rijnstate, Arnhem, Gelderland, Netherlands7 Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Isala Hospitals, Zwolle, Overijssel, Netherlands8 Fertility clinic, Vivaneo Medisch Centrum Kinderwens, Leiderdorp, Netherlandsprofessor in reproductive medicine1 Center for Reproductive Medicine, Amsterdam Reproduction & Development Institute, Amsterdam UMC, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, NetherlandsIntroduction At present, studies comparing intrauterine insemination in the natural cycle versus intracervical insemination in the natural cycle in women undergoing artificial insemination with donor sperm are scarce.Methods and analysis We perform a randomised controlled non-inferiority trial among five secondary and tertiary fertility clinics in the Netherlands and one tertiary fertility clinic in Belgium. Women eligible for artificial insemination with donor sperm are included. We perform six cycles of artificial insemination with donor sperm within a time horizon of 8 months comparing intrauterine insemination in the natural cycle with intracervical insemination in the natural cycle. The primary outcome is ongoing pregnancy leading to live birth conceived within eight months after randomisation. Secondary outcomes are clinical pregnancy rate, miscarriage rate, multiple pregnancy rate, pregnancy complications (preterm birth, birth weight <2500 g, pregnancy induced hypertension, (pre-) eclampsia, Hemolysis Elevated Liver enzymes Low Platelets (HELLP)), time to ongoing pregnancy, direct and indirect costs. To demonstrate the non-inferiority of intracervical insemination with a margin of 12%, we need 208 women per arm.Ethics and dissemination The study has been approved by the Medical Ethical Committee of the Academic Medical Centre and from the Dutch Central Committee on research involving human subjects (47330-018-13). The boards of the participating hospitals approved the study. Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and presentations at international scientific meetings.Trial registration number NTR4462https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/9/7/e026065.full
spellingShingle Sjoerd Repping
Ben Willem Mol
Petronella Kop
Rob Bernardus
Michael De Brucker
Pim Janssens
Ben Cohlen
Jacqueline Pieters
Fulco van der Veen
Monique H Mochtar
The AID study: protocol for a randomised controlled trial of intrauterine insemination in the natural cycle compared with intracervical insemination in the natural cycle
BMJ Open
title The AID study: protocol for a randomised controlled trial of intrauterine insemination in the natural cycle compared with intracervical insemination in the natural cycle
title_full The AID study: protocol for a randomised controlled trial of intrauterine insemination in the natural cycle compared with intracervical insemination in the natural cycle
title_fullStr The AID study: protocol for a randomised controlled trial of intrauterine insemination in the natural cycle compared with intracervical insemination in the natural cycle
title_full_unstemmed The AID study: protocol for a randomised controlled trial of intrauterine insemination in the natural cycle compared with intracervical insemination in the natural cycle
title_short The AID study: protocol for a randomised controlled trial of intrauterine insemination in the natural cycle compared with intracervical insemination in the natural cycle
title_sort aid study protocol for a randomised controlled trial of intrauterine insemination in the natural cycle compared with intracervical insemination in the natural cycle
url https://bmjopen.bmj.com/content/9/7/e026065.full
work_keys_str_mv AT sjoerdrepping theaidstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrialofintrauterineinseminationinthenaturalcyclecomparedwithintracervicalinseminationinthenaturalcycle
AT benwillemmol theaidstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrialofintrauterineinseminationinthenaturalcyclecomparedwithintracervicalinseminationinthenaturalcycle
AT petronellakop theaidstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrialofintrauterineinseminationinthenaturalcyclecomparedwithintracervicalinseminationinthenaturalcycle
AT robbernardus theaidstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrialofintrauterineinseminationinthenaturalcyclecomparedwithintracervicalinseminationinthenaturalcycle
AT michaeldebrucker theaidstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrialofintrauterineinseminationinthenaturalcyclecomparedwithintracervicalinseminationinthenaturalcycle
AT pimjanssens theaidstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrialofintrauterineinseminationinthenaturalcyclecomparedwithintracervicalinseminationinthenaturalcycle
AT bencohlen theaidstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrialofintrauterineinseminationinthenaturalcyclecomparedwithintracervicalinseminationinthenaturalcycle
AT jacquelinepieters theaidstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrialofintrauterineinseminationinthenaturalcyclecomparedwithintracervicalinseminationinthenaturalcycle
AT fulcovanderveen theaidstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrialofintrauterineinseminationinthenaturalcyclecomparedwithintracervicalinseminationinthenaturalcycle
AT moniquehmochtar theaidstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrialofintrauterineinseminationinthenaturalcyclecomparedwithintracervicalinseminationinthenaturalcycle
AT sjoerdrepping aidstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrialofintrauterineinseminationinthenaturalcyclecomparedwithintracervicalinseminationinthenaturalcycle
AT benwillemmol aidstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrialofintrauterineinseminationinthenaturalcyclecomparedwithintracervicalinseminationinthenaturalcycle
AT petronellakop aidstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrialofintrauterineinseminationinthenaturalcyclecomparedwithintracervicalinseminationinthenaturalcycle
AT robbernardus aidstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrialofintrauterineinseminationinthenaturalcyclecomparedwithintracervicalinseminationinthenaturalcycle
AT michaeldebrucker aidstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrialofintrauterineinseminationinthenaturalcyclecomparedwithintracervicalinseminationinthenaturalcycle
AT pimjanssens aidstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrialofintrauterineinseminationinthenaturalcyclecomparedwithintracervicalinseminationinthenaturalcycle
AT bencohlen aidstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrialofintrauterineinseminationinthenaturalcyclecomparedwithintracervicalinseminationinthenaturalcycle
AT jacquelinepieters aidstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrialofintrauterineinseminationinthenaturalcyclecomparedwithintracervicalinseminationinthenaturalcycle
AT fulcovanderveen aidstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrialofintrauterineinseminationinthenaturalcyclecomparedwithintracervicalinseminationinthenaturalcycle
AT moniquehmochtar aidstudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrialofintrauterineinseminationinthenaturalcyclecomparedwithintracervicalinseminationinthenaturalcycle