Author/Authors :
Zafardoust, Simin Reproductive Biotechnology Research Center - Avicenna Research Institute, ACECR, Tehran, Iran , Akhondi, Mohammad Mehdi Reproductive Biotechnology Research Center - Avicenna Research Institute, ACECR, Tehran, Iran , Sadeghi, Mohammad Reza Reproductive Biotechnology Research Center - Avicenna Research Institute, ACECR, Tehran, Iran , Mohammadzadeh, Afsaneh Reproductive Biotechnology Research Center - Avicenna Research Institute, ACECR, Tehran, Iran , Karimi, Atousa Reproductive Biotechnology Research Center - Avicenna Research Institute, ACECR, Tehran, Iran , Jouhari, Sheyda Reproductive Biotechnology Research Center - Avicenna Research Institute, ACECR, Tehran, Iran , Ansaripour, Soheila Reproductive Biotechnology Research Center - Avicenna Research Institute, ACECR, Tehran, Iran
Abstract :
Background: Endometrium undergoes several changes in structure and cellular composition
during pregnancy. Granulocyte Colony-stimulating Factor (GCS-F) is an important
cytokine with critical role in embryo implantation and pregnancy. The aim of
the present study was to evaluate the impact of intrauterine injection of G-CSF in patients
who suffer from unexplained recurrent miscarriage (RM).
Methods: In the present randomized clinical trial, a total of 68 patients were randomly
allocated into two study groups including intrauterine G-CSF (n=23, 300 μg) injection
and control group (n=27, no G-CSF injection). Eighteen out of 68 patients were
excluded from the final analysis due to different reasons. All patients were in Ovulation
Induction (I/O) cycle. In G-CSF group, intrauterine injection of G-CSF was
done twice in the cycle. All enrolled patients were under 40 years old and had at
least two unexplained pregnancy losses. Pregnancy was evaluated by titer of βhCG,
presence of gestational sac (implantation) and fetal heart rate (clinical pregnancy)
was assessed by vaginal ultrasonography. Student’s T test and Mann-Whitney U
were used for analysis. The p≤0.05 was determined as statistically significant.
Results: No significant differences were observed between the two study groups
when the rates of chemical pregnancy (26.1% vs. 29.6%, p=0.781), implantation
(26.1% vs. 22.2%, p=0.750), clinical pregnancy (17.4% vs. 11.1%, p=0.689) and
abortion (33% vs. 37.5%, p=0.296) were compared.
Conclusion: In our study, no significant difference was observed between the two
study groups when the rates of chemical pregnancy, implantation, clinical pregnancy and abortion were compared.