Table 1.

Impact of air filtration on clinical outcomes

Study	Patients (n)	Era	Particulates	Chemical air filtration	Variables	Outcome
Boone et al., 1999 [2]	275	1993–1997	Class 100	CIF	FR, CPR	Increased over time
Knaggs et al., 2007 [16]	NA	2006	Grade B	NA	CPR	42.6 vs 30.6
Jindal et al., 2008 [23]	380	2006–2007	NA	Carbon + KMnO4	CPR	46.8 vs 32.9
Dickey et al., 2010 [22]	324	2005–2009	NA	Carbon + KMnO4	CPR, IR	63.4 vs 46.4
Esteves and Bento, 2013 [12]	2315	1999–2010	ISO 5	CIF, Carbon	FR, BR, CPR	47.0 vs 40.0
Khoudja et al., 2013 [24]	1403	2011	HEPA	Carbon	FR, CR, BR, CPR, IR	All improved
Forman et al., 2014 [25]	1245	2012–2013	NA	Carbon, UVPCO	BR, IR, CPR, OPR	All Improved
Munch et al., 2015 [26]	524	2010–2012	HEPA	Lack of carbon	FR, CR, BR, CPR, IR, LBR	FR, CR, BR decreased

FR fertilization rate, CR cleavage rate, BR blastocyst rate, CPR clinical pregnancy rate, IR implantation rate, LBR live birth rate, OP ongoing pregnancy rate, CIF carbon-impregnated filter, KMnO ₄ potassium permanganate, UVPCO ultraviolet photocatalytic oxidation