Skip to main content
placeholder image

Randomized controlled trial of cervical cap with intracervical reservoir versus standard intracervical injection to inseminate cryopreserved donor semen

Journal Article


Abstract


  • A prospective controlled study of donor insemination without sperm preparation or ovarian stimulation was performed to compare the use of a cervical cap incorporating an intracervical reservoir with a standard intracervical injection technique to inseminate 0.5 ml cryopreserved semen. Treatments were alternated in successive cycles in each patient after initial randomized selection. A total of 198 patients had 635 treatment cycles (median 3, range 1-7), 309 with the reservoir and 326 by standard injection. A total of 56 women became pregnant, 24 (7.8% per cycle) with the reservoir and 32 (9.8% per cycle) by injection. There were no significant differences between the pregnancy rates per cycle overall or cycle-specific cumulative rates calculated using the life-table method. There were no significant differences in age, parity, baseline gonadotrophin measurements, mid-luteal serum progesterone concentrations, frequency (of adverse fertility factors in the woman or her partner's cause of infertility between women who conceived and those who failed to conceive. We conclude that use of a cervical reservoir and cap for donor insemination does not offer any advantage over standard intracervical insemination.

Publication Date


  • 1996

Citation


  • Coulson, C., McLaughlin, E. A., Harris, S., Ford, W. C. L., & Hull, M. G. R. (1996). Randomized controlled trial of cervical cap with intracervical reservoir versus standard intracervical injection to inseminate cryopreserved donor semen. Human Reproduction, 11(1), 84-87. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a019044

Scopus Eid


  • 2-s2.0-0030026619

Start Page


  • 84

End Page


  • 87

Volume


  • 11

Issue


  • 1

Abstract


  • A prospective controlled study of donor insemination without sperm preparation or ovarian stimulation was performed to compare the use of a cervical cap incorporating an intracervical reservoir with a standard intracervical injection technique to inseminate 0.5 ml cryopreserved semen. Treatments were alternated in successive cycles in each patient after initial randomized selection. A total of 198 patients had 635 treatment cycles (median 3, range 1-7), 309 with the reservoir and 326 by standard injection. A total of 56 women became pregnant, 24 (7.8% per cycle) with the reservoir and 32 (9.8% per cycle) by injection. There were no significant differences between the pregnancy rates per cycle overall or cycle-specific cumulative rates calculated using the life-table method. There were no significant differences in age, parity, baseline gonadotrophin measurements, mid-luteal serum progesterone concentrations, frequency (of adverse fertility factors in the woman or her partner's cause of infertility between women who conceived and those who failed to conceive. We conclude that use of a cervical reservoir and cap for donor insemination does not offer any advantage over standard intracervical insemination.

Publication Date


  • 1996

Citation


  • Coulson, C., McLaughlin, E. A., Harris, S., Ford, W. C. L., & Hull, M. G. R. (1996). Randomized controlled trial of cervical cap with intracervical reservoir versus standard intracervical injection to inseminate cryopreserved donor semen. Human Reproduction, 11(1), 84-87. doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a019044

Scopus Eid


  • 2-s2.0-0030026619

Start Page


  • 84

End Page


  • 87

Volume


  • 11

Issue


  • 1