| Literature DB >> 20607005 |
Sachin A Narvekar1, Neelima Gupta, Nivedita Shetty, Anu Kottur, Ms Srinivas, Kamini A Rao.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Estradiol levels fall rapidly in the luteal phase of ART cycles. So far, the effect of this estradiol decline on pregnancy outcome has remained controversial. AIM: To study the effect of early and midluteal estradiol decline on pregnancy and miscarriage rate. We also sought to determine whether estradiol fall was related to increased risk of bleeding per vagina in the first trimester among pregnancies which crossed 12 weeks.Entities:
Keywords: Clinical pregnancy; IVF/ICSI-ET; estradiol decline; luteal phase; ongoing pregnancy; preclinical abortion
Year: 2010 PMID: 20607005 PMCID: PMC2890906 DOI: 10.4103/0974-1208.63118
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Hum Reprod Sci ISSN: 1998-4766
Baseline characteristics
| Characteristics | Clinical pregnancy ( | Nonpregnant ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Age | 31 ± 4.2 | 31.8 ± 4.1 | 0.14 |
| Day 3 FSH | 5.3 ± 1.6 | 5.7 ± 2 | 0.13 |
| Long protocol (%) | 84 (70) | 115 (53.7) | 0.009 |
| Short protocol (%) | 10 (8.3) | 19 (8.9) | |
| Antagonist protocol (%) | 26 (21.7) | 80 (37.4) | |
| Mode of insemination (%) | |||
| IVF | 76 (63.3) | 110 (51.4) | 0.1 |
| ICSI | 40 (33.3) | 96 (44.9) | |
| Combined (IVF + ICSI) | 4 (3.3) | 8 (3.7) | |
| Amount of recombinant | 1462.7 ± 3.89 | 1480 ± 423.4 | 0.7 |
| FSH (IU) | |||
| No. of preovulatory | 6.9 | 5.3 | 0.000 |
| oocytes | |||
| No of oocytes | 12.1 ± 6.6 | 9.9 ± 6.3 | .003 |
| No. of cleaved embryos | 5.9 ± 3.1 | 4.65 ± 2.7 | 0.000 |
| No. of embryos transferred | 3.49 ± 6.06 | 3.18 ± 0.06 | .06 |
| Day of Embryo transfer (%) | |||
| Day 2 | 7 (5.8) | 24 (11.2) | 0.3 |
| Day 3 | 111(92.5) | 187 (87.4) | |
| Day 4 | 2 (1.7) | 2 (0.9) | |
| Day 5 | - | 1 (0.5) | |
| Peak E2 (pg/ml) | 2407.8 ± 1376 | 2305 ± 157 | 0.5 |
| Peak P4 (nmol/l) | 3.16 ± 2.3 | 3.3 ± 2.1 | 0.4 |
| Day 7 E2 (pg/ml) | 630 ± 576 | 699 ± 759 | 0.3 |
Impact of early and midluteal E2 fall on pregnancy outcome when compared in the three protocols
| Protocol | Clinical pregnancy | Not pregnant | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Midluteal down | |||
| Regulation | |||
| %EL-E2 decline | 39.6 ± 18.6 | 38.6 ± 20.99 | 0.7 |
| %ML-E2 decline | 74.2 ± 25.8 | 75.6 ± 26.7 | 0.7 |
| Short flare | |||
| %EL-E2 decline | 40.2 ± 24.3 | 39.4 ± 17.4 | 0.9 |
| %ML-E2 decline | 50.1 ± 33 | 68.5 ± 26 | 0.2 |
| Antagonist | |||
| %EL-E2 decline | 37.7 ± 25.1 | 37.2 ± 21.5 | 0.9 |
| %ML-E2 decline | 65.9 ± 25.6 | 61.6 ± 29.3 | 0.5 |
Impact of degree of midluteal E2 decline on pregnancy outcome
| % ML-E2Decline | Clinical pregnancy (%) (N = 120) | Nonpregnant (%) (N = 214) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| <25 | 19 (15.8) | 47 (22) | 0.4 |
| 25-49 | 17 (14.2) | 34 (15.9) | |
| 50-74 | 19(15.8) | 32 (15) | |
| >75 | 65 (54.2) | 101 (47.2) |
Impact of Early and midluteal E2 fall on first trimester miscarriage
| E2 decline (%) | Preclinical abortion (N = 24) | Clinical abortion (N = 21) | Ongoing pregnancy (N = 99) | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| EL-E2 decline | 36 ± 19 | 37.4 ± 25 | 39.3 ± 19 | 0.8 |
| ML-E2 decline | 68.5 ± 29 | 72.4 ± 30.4 | 70.2 ± 26.7 | 0.8 |
Figure 1ROC curve for %EL-E2 decline
Figure 2ROC curve for %ML-E2 decline
Effect of midluteal E2 decline on risk of first trimester bleeding
| E2 decline (%) | Bleeding PV ( | No bleeding PV ( | |
|---|---|---|---|
| ML-E2 decline | 64.8 ± 26.4 | 70.9 ± 27.1 | 0.5 |
| EL-E2 decline | 43.6 ± 25 | 38.9 ± 18 | 0.4 |