Skip to main content
. 2020 Feb 11;2020(2):CD001122. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD001122.pub5

Rezk 2016.

Methods Parallel randomised controlled trial. Single centre, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Menoufia University Hospital, Egypt
Timing: October 2014 to July 2015
Participants 108 women randomised. Mean age of women in unilateral ovarian drilling group was 29.7 ± 1.5 years and in bilateral ovarian drilling group was 29.8 ± 1.4 years
Inclusion criteria: Clomiphene‐resistant PCOS (revised Rotterdam criteria); normal semen analysis for partner, normal uterine cavity, bilateral tubal patency
Exclusion criteria: FSH > 15 IU/ml, medical disorders such as diabetes and hypertension, contraindications for laparoscopy, endocrine disorders, hyperprolactinaemia, thyroid disorder, Cushing syndrome, acromegaly, pelvic organ disease, abnormal semen analysis from partner
Interventions Unilateral ovarian drilling of the larger ovary. Number of punctures was calculated as Np = 60 J/cm3/ 30 W x 4 seconds (n = 52), versus
Bilateral ovarian drilling: 5 punctures per ovary at 30 W for 4 seconds. Each ovary received 600 J (n = 53)
Follow‐up for 6 months
Outcomes Ovulation rate, clinical pregnancy, ovarian reserve measures.
Notes Clinical trial registration number: PACTR201405000757313
No conflict of interest
Risk of bias
Bias Authors' judgement Support for judgement
Random sequence generation (selection bias) Low risk Quote: "randomly assigned into two groups" "computer generated simple random tables"
Allocation concealment (selection bias) Unclear risk No details provided
.
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) 
 All outcomes Unclear risk No details provided
.
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) 
 All outcomes Unclear risk No details provided
.
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) 
 All outcomes Low risk 108 women randomised.105 women analysed (2 lost in Unilateral group and 1 lost in Bilateral group ‐ reasons were loss to follow‐up)
Selective reporting (reporting bias) Low risk All prespecified outcomes were reported
Other bias Low risk Groups balanced at baseline. No other bias identified