Literature DB >> 23250342

Clomiphene combined with gonadotropins and GnRH antagonist versus conventional controlled ovarian hyperstimulation without clomiphene in women undergoing assisted reproductive techniques: systematic review and meta-analysis.

J B P Figueiredo1, C O Nastri, A D D Vieira, W P Martins.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the effectiveness and safety of controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) using clomiphene citrate associated with gonadotropin and GnRH antagonist (CC + Ant) versus conventional COH without clomiphene citrate (Non-CC) for women undergoing assisted reproductive techniques (ART).
METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled-trials comparing CC + Ant versus non-CC. The last search was performed in Apr 13 2012. The following outcomes were retrieved from included trials and compared between CC + Ant versus non-CC: live birth, clinical pregnancy, ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS), miscarriage, multiple pregnancy, endometrial thickness, total oocytes retrieved, MII oocytes retrieved, total gonadotropin used, and duration of COH.
RESULTS: Seven trials (702 participants) were included. There was no significant difference in live birth (55/182 = 30.2 % vs. 47/181 = 26.0 %, p = 0.26, CC + Ant vs. non-CC, respectively), clinical pregnancy (98/346 = 28.3 % vs. 84/356 = 23.6 %, p = 0.12), miscarriage (6/35 = 17.1 % vs. 7/32 = 21.9 %, p = 0.42), endometrial thickness, and on the number of oocytes retrieved. There was a significant reduction in OHSS (1/216 = 0.5 % vs. 9/217 = 4.1 %, p = 0.01), consumption of gonadotropins, and duration of COH.
CONCLUSIONS: Compared to non-CC, CC + Ant is likely to reduce the risk of OHSS, medication costs, and the duration of COH without evidence of effect on live birth and clinical pregnancy. More trials are still needed to improve the quality of the evidence. Future studies should evaluate women with PCOS or at increased risk of OHSS, quality of life, satisfaction with the treatment, total cost per live birth, and frequency of congenital anomalies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23250342     DOI: 10.1007/s00404-012-2672-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet        ISSN: 0932-0067            Impact factor:   2.344


  9 in total

Review 1.  Setting Up and Running a Successful IVF Program in Africa: Prospects and Challenges.

Authors:  R K Adageba; E T Maya; J J Annan; F J Damalie
Journal:  J Obstet Gynaecol India       Date:  2015-06-10

2.  Mild Versus Conventional Ovarian Stimulation for Poor Responders Undergoing IVF/ICSI.

Authors:  Charalampos Siristatidis; George Salamalekis; Konstantinos Dafopoulos; George Basios; Paraskevi Vogiatzi; Nikolaos Papantoniou
Journal:  In Vivo       Date:  2017 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.155

3.  "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

4.  Progestin-primed milder stimulation with clomiphene citrate yields fewer oocytes and suboptimal pregnancy outcomes compared with the standard progestin-primed ovarian stimulation in infertile women with polycystic ovarian syndrome.

Authors:  Hongjuan Ye; Hui Tian; Wen He; Qifeng Lyu; Yanping Kuang; Qiuju Chen; Lihua Sun
Journal:  Reprod Biol Endocrinol       Date:  2018-05-28       Impact factor: 5.211

5.  Minimal Stimulation In Vitro Fertilization: A Better Outcome.

Authors:  Adrija Kumar Datta
Journal:  Int J Fertil Steril       Date:  2016-06-01

6.  Anti-Müllerian hormone is correlated with cumulative live birth in minimal ovarian stimulation with clomiphene citrate: a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Kenji Ezoe; Xiaowen Ni; Tamotsu Kobayashi; Keiichi Kato
Journal:  BMC Pregnancy Childbirth       Date:  2020-11-27       Impact factor: 3.007

7.  Fresh and cumulative live birth rates in mild versus conventional stimulation for IVF cycles in poor ovarian responders: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Pedro Montoya-Botero; Panagiotis Drakopoulos; Iñaki González-Foruria; Nikolaos P Polyzos
Journal:  Hum Reprod Open       Date:  2021-02-14

8.  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

9.  Controlled ovarian hyperstimulation for poor ovarian responders undergoing in vitro fertilisation/intracytoplasmic sperm injection: a protocol for systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Huisheng Yang; Chensi Zheng; Qiyan Zheng; Huanfang Xu; Xiaotong Li; Mingzhao Hao; Yigong Fang
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2021-02-23       Impact factor: 2.692

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.