Literature DB >> 16785154

Comparison of outcome of clomiphene citrate/human menopausal gonadotropin/cetrorelix protocol and buserelin long protocol--a randomized study.

Yu-Hung Lin1, Jiann-Loung Hwang, Kok-Min Seow, Lee-Wen Huang, Bih-Chwen Hsieh, Chi-Ruey Tzeng.   

Abstract

This study evaluates the efficacy of a stimulation protocol with clomiphene citrate (CC)/human menopausal gonadotropin (hMG)/cetrorelix and its effects on oocyte quality and endometrium. One hundred and twenty couples with male-factor infertility who were about to undergo their first intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles were randomized into two groups. Sixty women were stimulated with the CC/hMG/cetrorelix protocol (cetrorelix group) and 60 received the buserelin long protocol (buserelin group). Fewer oocytes were recovered in the cetrorelix group than in the buserelin group (mean +/- standard deviation (SD): 11.1 +/- 4.0 vs. 17.3 +/- 5.8, p < 0.001); however, the percentages of metaphase II, metaphase I and germinal vesicle oocytes were similar between the two groups. Serum estradiol level was significantly lower in the cetrorelix than in the buserelin group (mean +/- SD: 2600.58 +/- 1189.11 vs. 3293.46 +/- 1221.49 pg/ml, p = 0.006), but the endometrial thickness was similar. The implantation rates (19.2% vs. 17.7%) and the pregnancy rates (41.7% vs. 40.0%) were similar between groups. The ampoules (mean +/- SD: 18.9 +/- 3.0 vs. 38.9 +/- 12.2, p < 0.001) and injections (mean +/- SD: 6.8 +/- 1.1 vs. 15.7 +/- 3.1, p < 0.001) of gonadotropin used were significantly lower in the cetrorelix group than in the buserelin group. No patients in either group developed a premature luteinizing hormone surge. The present study found no statistically significant difference between the two treatment modalities with regard to pregnancy rates.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2006        PMID: 16785154     DOI: 10.1080/09513590600702733

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gynecol Endocrinol        ISSN: 0951-3590            Impact factor:   2.260


  7 in total

1.  "Mild" vs. "long" protocol for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in patients with expected poor ovarian responsiveness undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF): a large prospective randomized trial.

Authors:  Alberto Revelli; Alessandra Chiadò; Paola Dalmasso; Veronica Stabile; Francesca Evangelista; Gemma Basso; Chiara Benedetto
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2014-04-04       Impact factor: 3.412

Review 2.  Milder is better? Advantages and disadvantages of "mild" ovarian stimulation for human in vitro fertilization.

Authors:  Alberto Revelli; Simona Casano; Francesca Salvagno; Luisa Delle Piane
Journal:  Reprod Biol Endocrinol       Date:  2011-02-16       Impact factor: 5.211

3.  High-response intrauterine insemination cycles converted to low-cost in vitro fertilization.

Authors:  Fatma Aletebi
Journal:  J Multidiscip Healthc       Date:  2011-05-10

Review 4.  Should mild stimulation be the order of the day?

Authors:  Nalini Mahajan
Journal:  J Hum Reprod Sci       Date:  2013-10

Review 5.  Low-cost in vitro fertilization: current insights.

Authors:  Pek Joo Teoh; Abha Maheshwari
Journal:  Int J Womens Health       Date:  2014-08-21

Review 6.  Optimal usage of the GnRH antagonists: a review of the literature.

Authors:  Alan B Copperman; Claudio Benadiva
Journal:  Reprod Biol Endocrinol       Date:  2013-03-15       Impact factor: 5.211

7.  Mild versus conventional ovarian stimulation for IVF in poor, normal and hyper-responders: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Adrija Kumar Datta; Abha Maheshwari; Nirmal Felix; Stuart Campbell; Geeta Nargund
Journal:  Hum Reprod Update       Date:  2021-02-19       Impact factor: 15.610

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.