Skip to content

Comparing Two Types of Needle for Oocytes Retrieval

Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Different Needles for Oocyte's Retrieval.

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03611907
Acronym
NEEDLE
Enrollment
200
Registered
2018-08-02
Start date
2019-03-06
Completion date
2021-01-20
Last updated
2022-09-27

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

ART, Infertility, Female

Brief summary

In the early stages of assisted reproductive technologies (ART), oocyte retrieval was performed via laparoscopy, a cumbersome and expensive process requiring general anesthesia. Today, transvaginal oocyte retrieval for ART is a routine procedure performed under ultrasound guidance. Double-lumen retrieval needles, which are capable of flushing ovarian follicles, were developed to overcome the possibility of oocyte retention within the ovarian follicles and retrieval collection system. Single lumen needles have been introduced and are routinely used by most groups due to their supposed ability to retrieve the same number of oocytes in a shorter operation time.

Detailed description

After a long period in which Humanitas department used double lumen needles for oocytes retrieval in the last four years the choice of the needle is an operator choice, usually influenced by the number of follicles present at human Chorionic Gonadotropin (hCG) trigger. This prospective randomized controlled clinical trial is designed to highlight differences between Double Lumen Aspiration Needle and Single Lumen Needle commonly used in Humanitas' clinical practice primarly in terms of number of retrived oocytes per procedure (A). Secondary outcomes are the number of punctured follicles (B), the retrieval rate (%) (A/B), the number of follicles at the last ultrasound performed prior to the ovulation trigger (C), the number of retrieved oocytes / number of follicles at trigger-day (A/C), retrieval procedure time (D), single oocyte retrieval time (D/A), the number of mature oocytes (and MII) and complications rate. Number of transferred embryos, number of frozen embryos and oocytes, clinical pregnancy rate per retrieval and per transfer (considering the number of pregnancies diagnosed by US visualization of one or more gestational sacs or definitive clinical signs of pregnancy per 100 cycles) and total number of clinical pregnancies with fetal heart beat (confirmed by visualization of one or more embryos with heartbeat at early dating ultrasound), are also evaluated. Standard protocols will be used for controlled ovarian hyper stimulation. Trans vaginal ultrasound-guided oocyte retrieval will be performed 36 hours ± 2 after hCG injection with the patient under deep sedation. One hundred patients per each needle will be enrolled in this trial.

Interventions

DEVICEOocyte retrieval with only aspiration system SL1(Cook® Single Lumen)

In this intervention a 17-Gauge needle is used to aspirate the follicles

DEVICEOocyte retrieval with aspiration and flushing system DL1 (Cook® EchoTip® Double Lumen)

In this intervention a 17-Gauge needle is used to aspirate follicle, and consequently a 1 mL flush is injected and aspirated twice for each punctured follicle

Sponsors

Istituto Clinico Humanitas
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Intervention model description

prospective randomized controlled clinical trial is designed to highlight differences between Double Lumen Aspiration Needle and Single Lumen Needle commonly used in clinical practice primarly in terms of number of retrieved oocytes per procedure.

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
FEMALE
Age
18 Years to 42 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* IVF/ intracytoplasmatic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles;

Exclusion criteria

* Ovarian Endometriomas; * Severe previous pelvic inflammatory disease with frozen pelvis

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Number of retrieved oocytes per procedurethrough study completion, 9 monthsComparison of the number of retrieved oocytes per procedure among the two arms

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Percentage of MII oocytes retrievedthrough study completion, 9 monthsA comparison between the percentage of MII oocytes retrieved among the two arms
Oocyte retrieval percentage per aspirated folliclesthrough study completion, 9 monthsComparison between the oocyte retrieval percentage per aspirated follicles among the two arms
number of punctured folliclesthrough study completion, 9 monthsComparison of the number of punctured follicles among the two arms
Time for single oocyte retrieval (minutes)through study completion, 9 monthscomparison between the recovery time for single oocyte in days among the two arms
the number of retrieved oocytes/ number of follicles at the trigger daythrough study completion, 9 monthsComparison of the number of retrieved oocytes/ number of follicles at the trigger day among the two arms
time of the single procedurethrough study completion, 9 monthsComparison of the time of the single procedure among the two arms
Complication ratethrough study completion, 9 monthsComparison of the complication rate among the two arms
number of follicles at the trigger daythrough study completion, 9 monthsComparison of the number of follicles at the trigger day among the two arms

Countries

Italy

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 11, 2026