Corrigendum to “Addition of Operative Hysteroscopy to Vacuum Aspiration for the Management of Early Pregnancy Loss After In Vitro Fertilization”: [Fertil Steril 2024;122:1134–43.] (Fertility and Sterility (2024) 122(6) (1134–1143), (S001502822400623X), (10.1016/j.fertnstert.2024.07.027))

Kai-Lun Hu, M.D.,^a,b,c,d Jie Zhao, M.D.,^a Mingmei Lin, M.D.,^a Xiaoye Wang, M.D.,^e Linjing Qi, M.D.,^e Huan Liu, M.D.,^f Dan Mo, M.D.,^a,g Zhonghong Zeng, M.D.,^a,g Ben W. Mol, M.D., Ph.D.,^h,i and Rong Li, M.D., Ph.D.^{a,b,c,d a} Center for Reproductive Medicine, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, People's Republic of China; ^b Key Laboratory of Assisted Reproduction, Peking University, Ministry of Education, Beijing, People's Republic of China; ^c Beijing Key Laboratory of Reproductive Endocrinology and Assisted Reproductive Technology, Beijing, People's Republic of China; ^d National Clinical Research Center for Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, People's Republic of China; ^e Birth Control Department, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Third Hospital, Beijing, People's Republic of China; ^f Linyi Central Hospital, Linyi City, Shandong Province, People's Republic of China; ^g The First Affiliated Hospital of Guangxi Medical University, Nanning, Guangxi, People's Republic of China; ^h Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Monash University, Clayton, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia; and ⁱ Aberdeen Centre for Women's Health Research, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, United Kingdom The investigators regret an error in the original analysis of clinical and biochemical pregnancy outcomes. In the published article, we stated that we reported clinical and biochemical pregnancy rates per transfer, whereas, in reality, we reported “cumulative clinical pregnancy” and “cumulative biochemical pregnancy” by error. These should instead be corrected to clinical pregnancy rate per transfer and biochemical pregnancy rate per transfer following the first embryo transfer. The investigators wish to correct the following errors in the original manuscript. “Compared to women who underwent vacuum aspiration, those who underwent vacuum aspiration plus hysteroscopy were associated with a lower rate of live birth in the propensity-based matched cohort (22% vs 30%, aOR = 0.68 (0.47, 0.97)). Biochemical, clinical, and multiple pregnancy rates were not significantly different, as was miscarriage rate.” “Compared with women who underwent vacuum aspiration, those who underwent vacuum aspiration plus hysteroscopy were associated with a lower rate of live birth and clinical pregnancy in the propensity-based matched cohort (live birth rate: 22% vs 30%, aOR: 0.68 [0.47–0.97]; clinical pregnancy rate: 30% vs. 38%, aOR: 0.71 [0.48–0.99]). Biochemical and multiple pregnancy rates were not significantly different, as was the miscarriage rate.” “Compared to vacuum aspiration, vacuum aspiration plus hysteroscopy was associated with a lower rate of live birth (22% vs 30%, aOR = 0.68 (0.47, 0.97)) (Table 2). No statistical difference was detected on the biochemical pregnancy rate, clinical pregnancy rate, multiple pregnancy rate, and miscarriage rate.” “Compared with vacuum aspiration, vacuum aspiration plus hysteroscopy was associated with a lower rate of live birth (22% vs. 30%, aOR: 0.68 [0.47–0.97]) and clinical pregnancy (30% vs. 38%, aOR: 0.71 [0.48–0.99]).” ○ Vacuum aspiration + hysteroscopy group: 97/323 (30%)○ Vacuum aspiration alone group: 124/326 (38%)○ Odds Ratio (OR): 0.69 (95% CI: 0.50–0.96)○ Adjusted OR (aOR): 0.71 (95% CI: 0.48–0.99) (Model 1)○ Adjusted OR (aOR): 0.65 (95% CI: 0.45–0.94) (Model 2) ○ Vacuum aspiration + hysteroscopy group: 133/323 (41%)○ Vacuum aspiration alone group: 153/326 (47%)○ Odds Ratio (OR): 0.78 (95% CI: 0.57–1.06)○ Adjusted OR (aOR): 0.80 (95% CI: 0.58–1.09) (Model 1)○ Adjusted OR (aOR): 0.76 (95% CI: 0.54–1.05) (Model 2) The revised analysis does not alter the study's primary conclusion regarding the lack of significant benefit from adjunct hysteroscopy. However, the corrected rates more accurately reflect per-transfer outcomes, eliminating the prior overestimation of pregnancy probabilities.