Literature DB >> 24908672

The Bologna criteria for poor ovarian response: the good, the bad and the way forward.

Christos A Venetis1.   

Abstract

The management of poor ovarian response (POR) remains one of the most significant challenges of in vitro fertilization. Numerous interventions have been proposed, yet few have been shown to be beneficial. The most important problem in evaluating the available evidence has been the lack of a standardized definition of POR. The Bologna criteria for POR have been recently introduced to provide a framework allowing future research in this field to be performed on a relatively homogenous population. However, it has been suggested that the population described by the Bologna criteria might not be sufficiently homogenous and for this reason stratified randomization should be used in relevant randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Stratified randomization, besides its advantages, also has important shortcomings and for this reason it should be used only when there is clear evidence mandating such a design. Currently, there is insufficient data to support such practice in RCTs performed on the population described by the Bologna criteria for POR. Until such evidence becomes available, the scientific community should aim at evaluating interventions for POR according to the Bologna criteria in RCTs of sufficient sample size, with proper allocation concealment and masking.
© The Author 2014. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.

Keywords:  ovarian stimulation; poor ovarian response; randomized controlled trials

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 24908672     DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deu138

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Reprod        ISSN: 0268-1161            Impact factor:   6.918


  10 in total

1.  Diminished ovarian reserve in the United States assisted reproductive technology population: diagnostic trends among 181,536 cycles from the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcomes Reporting System.

Authors:  Kate Devine; Sunni L Mumford; Mae Wu; Alan H DeCherney; Micah J Hill; Anthony Propst
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2015-06-11       Impact factor: 7.329

2.  Live birth rates in the different combinations of the Bologna criteria poor ovarian responders: a validation study.

Authors:  Antonio La Marca; Valentina Grisendi; Simone Giulini; Giovanna Sighinolfi; Alessandra Tirelli; Cindy Argento; Claudia Re; Daniela Tagliasacchi; Tiziana Marsella; Sesh Kamal Sunkara
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2015-05-01       Impact factor: 3.412

3.  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

Review 4.  Reproductive ovarian testing and the alphabet soup of diagnoses: DOR, POI, POF, POR, and FOR.

Authors:  Lisa M Pastore; Mindy S Christianson; James Stelling; William G Kearns; James H Segars
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2017-10-02       Impact factor: 3.412

5.  Minimal ovarian stimulation is an alternative to conventional protocols for older women according to Poseidon's stratification: a retrospective multicenter cohort study.

Authors:  Mauro Cozzolino; Gustavo Nardini Cecchino; Ernesto Bosch; Juan Antonio Garcia-Velasco; Nicolás Garrido
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2021-04-13       Impact factor: 3.357

Review 6.  The Bologna criteria for poor ovarian response: a contemporary critical appraisal.

Authors:  Johnny S Younis; Moshe Ben-Ami; Izhar Ben-Shlomo
Journal:  J Ovarian Res       Date:  2015-11-17       Impact factor: 4.234

Review 7.  Defining Low Prognosis Patients Undergoing Assisted Reproductive Technology: POSEIDON Criteria-The Why.

Authors:  Sandro C Esteves; Matheus Roque; Giuliano M Bedoschi; Alessandro Conforti; Peter Humaidan; Carlo Alviggi
Journal:  Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)       Date:  2018-08-17       Impact factor: 5.555

Review 8.  Poor ovarian response and the possible role of natural and modified natural cycles.

Authors:  Federica Di Guardo; Christophe Blockeel; Michel De Vos; Marco Palumbo; Nikolaos Christoforidis; Herman Tournaye; Panagiotis Drakopoulos
Journal:  Ther Adv Reprod Health       Date:  2022-01-14

Review 9.  Poor ovarian reserve.

Authors:  Padma Rekha Jirge
Journal:  J Hum Reprod Sci       Date:  2016 Apr-Jun

10.  Comparison of the Cumulative Live Birth Rates of Progestin-Primed Ovarian Stimulation and Flexible GnRH Antagonist Protocols in Patients With Low Prognosis.

Authors:  Mingze Du; Junwei Zhang; Zhen Li; Xinmi Liu; Jing Li; Wenxia Liu; Yichun Guan
Journal:  Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)       Date:  2021-09-13       Impact factor: 5.555

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.