Literature DB >> 17579976

Hopes and facts about mild ovarian stimulation.

F Ubaldi1, L Rienzi, E Baroni, S Ferrero, M Iacobelli, M G Minasi, F Sapienza, S Romano, A Colasante, K Litwicka, E Greco.   

Abstract

Over the last two decades, easier and less expensive stimulation treatments have been largely replaced by more complex and more demanding protocols. Since the mid-nineties, long-term gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist stimulation protocols have been widely used. Such lengthy expensive regimens are not free from short- and long-term risks and complications. Mild stimulation protocols reduce the mean number of days of stimulation, the total amount of gonadotrophins used and the mean number of oocytes retrieved. The proportion of high quality and euploid embryos seems to be higher compared with conventional stimulation protocols and the pregnancy rate per embryo transfer is comparable. Moreover, the reduced costs, the better tolerability for patients and the less time needed to complete an IVF cycle make mild approaches clinically and cost-effective over a given period of time. However, further prospective randomized studies are needed to compare cumulative pregnancy rates between the two protocols. Natural cycle IVF, with minimal stimulation, has been recently proposed as an alternative to conventional stimulation protocols in normo- and poor responder patients. Although acceptable results have been reported, further large prospective randomized studies are needed to better evaluate the efficacy of these minimal regimens compared with conventional stimulation approaches.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2007        PMID: 17579976     DOI: 10.1016/s1472-6483(10)60667-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Reprod Biomed Online        ISSN: 1472-6483            Impact factor:   3.828


  10 in total

Review 1.  Ultrastructural Evaluation of the Human Oocyte at the Germinal Vesicle Stage during the Application of Assisted Reproductive Technologies.

Authors:  Maria Grazia Palmerini; Sevastiani Antonouli; Guido Macchiarelli; Sandra Cecconi; Serena Bianchi; Mohammad Ali Khalili; Stefania Annarita Nottola
Journal:  Cells       Date:  2022-05-13       Impact factor: 7.666

2.  Egg sharing in return for subsidized fertility treatment--ethical challenges and pitfalls.

Authors:  Boon Chin Heng
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 3.412

3.  Affordable ART for developing countries: a cost benefit comparison of low dose stimulation versus high dose GnRH antagonist protocol.

Authors:  M Noorashikin; F B Ong; M H Omar; M R Zainul-Rashid; A Z Murad; A Shamsir; M A Norsina; A Nurshaireen; N S M N Sharifah-Teh; A H Fazilah
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2008-07-25       Impact factor: 3.412

4.  MILD ovarian stimulation with GnRH-antagonist vs. long protocol with low dose FSH for non-PCO high responders undergoing IVF: a prospective, randomized study including thawing cycles.

Authors:  Simona Casano; Daniela Guidetti; Ambra Patriarca; Giulia Pittatore; Gianluca Gennarelli; Alberto Revelli
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2012-10-20       Impact factor: 3.412

Review 5.  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

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

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

Review 7.  Management of poor responders in IVF: is there anything new?

Authors:  Filippo Ubaldi; Alberto Vaiarelli; Rosario D'Anna; Laura Rienzi
Journal:  Biomed Res Int       Date:  2014-07-20       Impact factor: 3.411

8.  Clomiphene citrate versus high doses of gonadotropins for in vitro fertilisation in women with compromised ovarian reserve: a randomised controlled non-inferiority trial.

Authors:  Guido Ragni; Paolo E Levi-Setti; Rubens Fadini; Claudio Brigante; Claudia Scarduelli; Federica Alagna; Veronica Arfuso; Mario Mignini-Renzini; Massimo Candiani; Alessio Paffoni; Edgardo Somigliana
Journal:  Reprod Biol Endocrinol       Date:  2012-12-18       Impact factor: 5.211

9.  Comparison of results of cycles treated with modified mild protocol and short protocol for ovarian stimulation.

Authors:  F Coelho; L F Aguiar; G S P Cunha; N Cardinot; E Lucena
Journal:  Int J Reprod Med       Date:  2014-08-06

Review 10.  Severe male factor in in vitro fertilization: definition, prevalence, and treatment. An update.

Authors:  Rossella Mazzilli; Alberto Vaiarelli; Lisa Dovere; Danilo Cimadomo; Nicolò Ubaldi; Susanna Ferrero; Laura Rienzi; Francesco Lombardo; Andrea Lenzi; Herman Tournaye; Filippo Maria Ubaldi
Journal:  Asian J Androl       Date:  2022 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.285

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.