Skip to main content
The HFEA has launched its new Media Centre where you can find the latest news and information from us. Access it here.

Endometrial scratching

For most patients, having a routine cycle of proven fertility treatment is effective without using any treatment add-ons.

Our ratings indicate whether the evidence from studies shows that a treatment add-on is effective at improving treatment outcomes for someone undergoing fertility treatment. Our rating do not tell you how much that treatment add-on improves your chances of having a baby – please discuss this with your clinic.

What is endometrial scratching?

In order to have a successful pregnancy, an embryo needs to ‘implant’ in the womb; if it doesn’t, the patient will need to start their cycle again.

Most embryos don’t implant because they have been unable to develop fully to the implantation stage or because of a developmental mismatch between the stage of the embryo and the lining of the womb. In a small number of cases an embryo won’t implant because the lining of the womb isn’t providing them with the right environment.

Endometrial scratching (also known as endometrial injury) is carried out before IVF. During the procedure the lining of the womb (the endometrium) is ‘scratched’ using a small sterile plastic tube.

The theory is that this procedure triggers the body to repair the site of the scratch, releasing chemicals and hormones that make the womb lining more receptive to an embryo implanting. Some also suggest the treatment may activate genes that make the womb lining more receptive to an embryo implanting.

Rated outcomes for endometrial scratching
Rated amber for increasing the chances of having a baby for most fertility patients undergoing IVF or ICSI
Yellow traffic light
For most fertility patients undergoing IVF or ICSI, the use of endometrial scratching is rated amber for improving the chances of having a baby. This is because, on balance, it is not clear whether this add-on is effective at improving the treatment outcome. This is because there is conflicting moderate/high quality evidence – in some studies the add-on has been found to be effective, but in other studies it has not.
This rating does not apply to patients undergoing IUI given that many of the high-quality studies that were assessed did not include patients undergoing IUI.
Rated grey for improving the chances of having a baby for patients with recurrent implantation failure (RIF)
Grey traffic light
We cannot rate the effectiveness of this add-on at for improving the chances of having a baby for patients with RIF as there is insufficient moderate/high quality evidence.

What do the ratings mean?

There are five ratings that indicate whether a treatment add-on is effective at improving treatment outcomes for someone undergoing fertility treatment, according to the evidence from studies. To make it easier to understand the scientific evidence for each treatment add-on we have a range of symbols and colours for each rated add-on below.

Green traffic light

On balance, findings from high quality evidence shows this add-on is effective at improving the treatment outcome.

Yellow traffic light

On balance, it is not clear whether this add-on is effective at improving the treatment outcome. This is because there is conflicting moderate/high quality evidence – in some studies the add-on has been found to be effective, but in other studies it has not.

Grey traffic light

We cannot rate the effectiveness of this add-on at improving the treatment outcome as there is insufficient moderate/high quality evidence.

Black traffic light

On balance, the findings from moderate/high quality evidence shows that this add-on has no effect on the treatment outcome.

Red traffic light

There are potential safety concerns and/or, on balance, findings from moderate/high quality evidence shows that this add-on may reduce treatment effectiveness.

All treatment add-ons on our list will have a rating to indicate whether the evidence shows that the treatment add-on is effective at improving the chances of having a baby for most fertility patients. Some treatment add-ons on our list may also have additional ratings for specific treatment outcomes. For example, whether the evidence shows that the treatment add-on reduces miscarriage. There may also be further ratings for specific patient groups, for example whether the evidence shows that the treatment add-on is effective for those who are aged over 40. Please see the individual webpages for each treatment add-on for their ratings.

An agreement between the HFEA and other professional and patient bodies (the 19th October 2023 consensus statement) states that treatments that have no strong evidence of their safety and/or effectiveness should only be offered in a research setting. Patients should not be charged extra to take part in research, including clinical trials.

What’s the evidence for endometrial scratching?

A number of high-quality studies have been completed to date with conflicting results. Further evidence is needed before the benefits of endometrial scratching can be confirmed.

Studies investigating endometrial scratching focused on patients undergoing IVF or ICSI, and therefore these ratings do not apply to patients undergoing IUI. In addition, there were no moderate/high quality studies explicitly investigating patients with RIF, therefore there is no evidence that endometrial scratching is beneficial for this patient group either.

At the July 2023 Scientific and Clinical Advances Advisory Committee (SCAAC) meeting the Committee evaluated the evidence base for endometrial scratch. Minutes of this discussion and the evidence used to inform this are available on the SCAAC webpage.

This Cochrane review has further information on the evidence for endometrial scratching.

Is this treatment add-on safe?

This is an intrusive and potentially painful procedure, with some patients experiencing some blood loss. It is not common for patients to have an infection after the scratch but there is a small risk that if you have an infection within your cervix before ‘scratching’, this may cause the infection to spread into the uterus. Your clinic can treat this if necessary. Endometrial scratching does not carry any additional known risks for the child born as a result of fertility treatment.

If you have any questions about the safety and risks, your clinic will be able to discuss whether a treatment add-on would be safe for you to use considering your specific medical history and circumstances.

Studies reviewed for this treatment add-on

The SCAAC have reviewed the following studies for endometrial scratching:

Raziel 2007 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2006.05.062
Zhou 2008 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.05.064
Karimzadeh 2009 10.1111/j.1479-828X.2009.01076
Narvekar 2010 10.4103/0974-1208.63116
Abdelhamid 2012 10.1007/s00404-013-2785-0
Nastri2013 10.1002/uog.12539
Gibreel 2013 10.1111/j.1447-0756.2012.02016.x
Parsanezhad 2013 IRCT:2012082510657NI
Zarei 2014 IRCT:2012070810210NI
Wadhwa 2015 J Hum Reprod Sci 2015;8(3):151-8.
El Khayat 2015 10.1016/j/ejogrb.2015.08.025
Gibreel 2015 10.3109/09513590.2014.994603
Maged 2016 10.1177/1933719115602776
Bahaa Eldin 2016 10.1177/1933719116638191
Goel 2017 10.1007/s10815-017-0949-8
Mak 2017 10.1016/j.rbmo.2017.04.004
Aleyamma 2017 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2017.05.005
Helmy 2017 10.1002/ijgo.12178
Senocak 2017 10.1016/j.jogoh.2017.09.003
Ashrafi 2017 10.1111/jog.13401
Maged 2018 10.1002/ijgo.12355
Hilton 2019 10.1007/s00404-019-05044-9
Eskew 2019 10.1007/s10815-018-1356-5
Frantz 2019 10.1093/humrep/dey334
Lensen 2019 10.1056/NEJMoa1808737
Olesen 2019 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.08.010
Mackens 2020 10.1093/humrep/deaa018
Tang 2020 10.1111/jog.14193
Berntsen 2020 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2020.06.034
Ghuman 2020 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2020.08.010
Rodriguez 2020 10.1007/s43032-020-00204-8
van Hoogenhuijze 2021 10.1093/humrep/deaa268
Metwally 2021 10.1093/humrep/deab041
Yavangi 2021 10.18502/ijrm.v19i5.9255
Glanville 2022 10.1016/j.rbmo.2021.10.008
Izquierdo 2022 10.1016/j.jogoh.2022.102335
Madhuri 2022 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2021.10.028
Metwally 2022 10.3310/JNZT9406
Wong 2022 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2021.12.009
Baum 2012 10.3109/09513590.2011.650750
Zhang 2014 10.1007/s00404-014-3382-6
Zhang 2015 10.1007/s11655-014-1843-1
Bord 2015 10.1007/s00404-015-3954-0
Siristatidis 2017 10.1080/09513590.2016.1255325
Gürgan 2019 10.1016/j.rbmo.2019.02.014
Tumanyan 2019 10.1080/09513590.2019.1632085
Aghajanpour 2021 10.1016/j.jri.2021.103426

What are treatment add-ons?

In vitro fertilisation (IVF) and intrauterine insemination (IUI) are established treatments that have been proven effective for most patients. Treatment add-ons are optional non-essential treatments that may be offered in addition to such proven fertility treatment. The HFEA provides information on add-ons that meet the following criteria:

  • Additional treatments (to the core treatment e.g. IVF or IUI), that are being offered to the general patient population in licensed fertility clinics in the UK,
  • Where there are published scientific studies which claim to demonstrate that the treatment add-on improves the chances of having a baby or other treatment outcomes rated by the HFEA; but
  • where evidence of effectiveness for the use of the treatment in a clinical setting is lacking or absent; and
  • where patients need unbiased information about the effectiveness and risks of this treatment.

It is important to keep in mind that for most patients, having a routine cycle of proven fertility treatment is effective without using any treatment add-ons. If you are paying directly for your own treatment, you may want to think about whether it might be more effective and/or affordable to pay for multiple routine proven treatment cycles, rather than spending large sums of money on a single treatment cycle with treatment add-ons that haven’t been proven to be effective at increasing the likelihood of you having a baby.

We aim to publish clear and reliable information about some of the treatment add-ons that don’t have enough evidence to show that they are effective at improving your chances of having a baby and other relevant treatment outcomes. This provides useful information to patients and allows them to question the use of add-ons.

Review date: 19 October 2025