| Authors & studies Design | No. de MII | MII rate (%) | Clinical pregnancy rate | Study size |
| RCT |
|
|
|
|
| Decleer [10] | 10.3 vs. 9.5 | ND | 31 vs. 44 | 120 |
| Kim [11] | 9.0 vs. 8.9 | ND | 53 vs. 33* | 120 |
| Mahajan [12] | 8.4 vs. 7.2 | ND | ND | 76 |
| Eftekhar [13] | 8.8 vs. 7.9 | ND | 26 vs. 22 | 192 |
| Schachter [17] | ND | ND | 44 vs. 29* | 211 |
| Observ |
|
|
|
|
| Zhou [15] | 6.6 vs. 5.8 | 75 vs. 73 | 62 vs. 52 | 325 |
| Fabris [20] | 5.3 vs. 2.4* | 79 vs. 43* | 43 vs. 26* | 81 |
| Zilberberg [21] | 6.5 vs. 3.6* | 68 vs. 47* | 50 vs. 0* | 12 |
| Herbemont [22] | 9.1 vs. 5.5* | 71 vs. 47* | 31 vs. 23 | 47 |
| Lin [23] | 2.75 vs. 2.85 | ND | 33 vs. 20 | 427 |
| Meta-analysis |
|
|
|
|
| Chen [17] | a | ND | b | 527 |
| Ding [16] | a | ND | b | 527 |
| Our study | 4.6 v 4.1 | ND | 5.9% vs. 26.5% | 51 |