Role of Vascular Endothelial Growth Factor (VEGF) and Doppler Sub-endometrial Parameters as Predictors of Successful Implantation in Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection (ICSI) Patients

Wafaa Salih Rahmatullah; Manal Taha Al-Obaidi; Wasan I. AL-Saadi; Mohammad Oda Selman; Ghasak Ghazi Faisal

doi:10.33192/Smj.2020.05

Authors

Wafaa Salih Rahmatullah High Institute of Infertility Diagnosis and ARTs /Al-Nahrain University, Malaysia
Manal Taha Al-Obaidi High Institute of Infertility Diagnosis and ARTs /Al-Nahrain University, Malaysia
Wasan I. AL-Saadi Medical College/Al-Nahrain University, Malaysia
Mohammad Oda Selman High Institute of Infertility Diagnosis and ARTs /Al-Nahrain University, Malaysia
Ghasak Ghazi Faisal Department of Fundamental Dental and Medical sciences, International Islamic University Malaysia, Malaysia http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4736-7630

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.33192/Smj.2020.05

Keywords:

VEGF; Sub-endometrial doppler; infertility

Abstract

Objective: to investigate the expression of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) in patients having infertility due to low endometrial acceptance, and to correlate it to non-invasive ultrasound variables, endometrial thickness, and sub-endometrial Doppler parameters (PI, RI, Vs/Vd).
Methods: 80 women all under the age of 40 underwent ICSI-ET; all patients were exposed to ovarian stimulation protocols. The oocytes were retrieved using an ultrasound guide, and were fertilised via injection of sperm inside the follicle (ICSI). VEGF serum level was analysed at day of embryo transfer by ELIZA test, and sub-endometrial evaluation was conducted via two-dimension power Doppler ultrasound (2D PD-US), by measuring resistance index (RI) and pulsatility index (PI) on the day of embryo transfer.
Results: There was a significantly higher VEGF level and endometrial thickness in pregnant (433± 207 and 9.72± 1.35) women, compared to non-pregnant (276± 165 and 8.95 ± 1.21) respectively as p-values were (0.001 and 0.01)). Additionally, there were significantly lower RI and PI in pregnant (0.584 ± 0.124 and 0.829 ± 0.301) women compared to non-pregnant (0.651±0.132 and 1.006±0.335) women, as p-values were (0.02 and 0.02, respectively). The level of E2 was on the day of embryo transfer and Vs/Vd in pregnant women (1402± 524 and 3.14 ± 3.75) and in the non-pregnant group (1296± 611 and 3.82 ± 3.07), as p-values were 0.41 and 0.38, respectively.
Conclusion: The combined analysis of endometrial receptivity was completed, and the serum level of VEGF and sub-endometrial evaluation with 2D PD-US was defined by measuring resistance index (RI) and pulsatility index (PI) on the day of embryo transfer. These can serve as useful prognostic methods for the detection of endometrial receptivity and pregnancy outcomes in infertile women undergoing ICSI protocols, and will be helpful for candidate counselling about postponing embryo transfer and cryopreservation, which may serve as a better option, to be recommended for the next cycle, when achieving better endometrial Doppler parameters.

References

1. Nordqvist C. Infertility: Causes, Diagnosis, Risks, Treatments. Medical News Today, 21
January 2016. Available from: www.medicalnewstoday.com
2. National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence. Fertility: assessment and treatment for people with fertility problems. NICE Clinical Guidelines, No. 11, Feb.2004.
3. Balen AH, Rutherford AJ. Management of infertility. BMJ 2007;335:608-11.
4. Padmanabhan RA, Laloraya M. Estrogen-Initiated Protein Interactomes During Embryo Implantation. Am J Reprod Immunol 2016;75:256-62.
5. Kim A, Han JE, Yoon TK, Lyu SW, Seok HH, Won HJ. Relationship between endometrial and subendometrial blood flow measured by three-dimensional power Doppler ultrasound and pregnancy after intrauterine insemination. Fertil Steril 2010;94:747-52.
6. Ivanovski M. The Role of Ultrasound in the Evaluation of Endometrial Receptivity Following Assisted Reproductive Treatments. In: Friendler S, ed. In Vitro Fertilization. IntechOpen Ltd., London, UK. Published: April 11th, 2012. DOI: 10.5772/2323.
7. Naftalin J. Ultrasound studies of the endometrial-myometrial junction for the diagnosis of adenomyosis and endometrial cancer. The Gynaecology Diagnostic and Outpatient Treatment Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Elizabeth Garrett Anderson Wing, University College Hospital, Grafton Way, London. WC1H. Thesis submitted for the degree of MD(Res), University College London, March 2014.
8. Zaidi J, Campbell S, Pittrof R, Tan SL. Endometrial thickness, morphology, vascular penetration and velocimetry in predicting implantation in an in vitro fertilization program. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 1995;6:191-8.
9. Smith SK. Regulation of angiogenesis in the endometrium. Trends Endocrinol Metab 2001;12:147-51.
10. Nardo LG. Vascular endothelial growth factor expression in the endometrium during the menstrual cycle, implantation window and early pregnancy. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2005;17:419-23.
11. Hannan NJ, Paiva P, Meehan KL, Rombauts LJ, Gardner DK, Salamonsen LA. Analysis of fertility-related soluble mediators in human uterine fluid identifies VEGF as a key regulator of embryo implantation. Endocrinology 2011;152:4948-56.
12. Yang JH, Wu MY, Chen CD, Jiang MC, Ho HN, Yang YS. Association of endometrial blood flow as determined by a modified color doppler technique with subsequent outcome of in-vitro fertilization. Hum Reprod 1999;14:1606-10.
13. El-Zenneni H, Moustafa R, Abdel-Hafeez M, El-Salally H, Abdel-Kader A, Elnaggar A. Assessment of uterine, subendometrial blood flows and endometrial gland vascular endothelial growth factor (EG-VEGF) in women with unexplained infertility. Middle East Fertility Society Journal 2015;20:119-26.
14. Schild RL, Holthaus S, d'Alquen J, Fimmers R, Dorn C, van Der Ven H, Hansmann M. Quantitative assessment of subendometrial blood flow by three-dimensional- ultrasound is an important predictive factor in an in-vitro fertilization programme. Hum Reprod 2000;15:89-94.
15. Nayak NR, Brenner RM. Vascular proliferation and vascular endothelial growth factor expression in the rhesus macaque endometrium. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2002;87:1845-55.
16. Miwa I, Tamura H, Takasaki A, Yamagata Y, Shimamura K, Sugino N. Pathophysiologic features of “thin” endometrium. Fertil Steril 2009;91:998-1004.
17. El-Toukhy T, Coomarasamy A, Khairy M, Sunkara K, Seed P, Khalaf Y, Braude P. The relationship between endometrial thickness and outcome of medicated frozen embryo replacement cycles. Fertil Steril 2008;89:832-9.
18. Schild RL, Knobloch C, Dorn C, Fimmers R, van der Ven H, Hansmann M. Endometrial receptivity in an in vitro fertilization program as assessed by spiral artery blood flow, endometrial thickness, endometrial volume, and uterine artery blood flow. Fertil Steril 2001;75:361-6.
19. Kasius A, Smit JG, Torrance HL, Eijkemans MJ, Mol BW, Opmeer BC, Broekmans FJ. Endometrial thickness and pregnancy rates after IVF: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update 2014;20:530-41.
20. Habibzadeh V, Nematolahi Mahani SN, Kamyab H. The correlation of factors affecting the endometrial thickness with pregnancy outcome in the IUI cycles. Iran J Reprod Med 2011;9:41-6.
21. Matyas S, Boda K, Kaali SG. The effect of endometrial thickness on IVF/ICSI outcome. Hum Reprod 2003;18:2337-41.
22. Zhao J, Zhang Q, Li Y. The effect of endometrial thickness and pattern measured by ultrasonography on pregnancy outcomes during IVF-ET cycles. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2012 28;10:100.
23. Raine-Fenning NJ, Campbell BK, Kendall NR, Clewes JS, Johnson IR. Endometrial and subendometrial perfusion are impaired in women with unexplained subfertility. Hum Reprod 2004;19:2605-14.
24. El-Zenneni H, Moustafa R, Abdel-Hafeez M, El-Salally H, Abdel-Kader A, Elnaggar A. Assessment of uterine, subendometrial blood flows and endometrial gland vascular endothelial growth factor (EG-VEGF) in women with unexplained infertility. Middle East Fertility Society Journal 2015;20:119-26.
25. Jain P, Paul S, Gupta U, Tuli A, Jain M. Doppler Blood Flow Studies of the Endometrium and Its Relation with Serum VEGF in Women with Unexplained Infertility. IOSR Journal of Dental and Medical Sciences (IOSR-JDMS) 2015;14:74-78.