Literature DB >> 24955194

Comparison of different ovarian hyperstimulation protocols efficacy in poor ovarian responders according to the Bologna criteria.

Linli Hu1, Zhiqin Bu1, Yihong Guo1, Yingchun Su1, Jun Zhai1, Yingpu Sun1.   

Abstract

Many protocols have been proposed to improve IVF outcomes for poor ovarian responders. The aim of this study was to explore the relationship between age, ovarian hyperstimulation protocol and IVF/ICSI outcomes in poor ovarian responder (POR) according to the Bologna criteria, and to compare the efficacy of different protocols used in PORs undergoing IVF/ICSI. We retrospectively analyzed clinical data of 4875 IVF/ICSI cycles, including 592 cycles of women diagnosed with POR according to Bologna criteria. We explored the association of age, different types of ovarian hyperstimulation protocols and prevalence of POR, IVF/ICSI outcomes. Age, basic FSH, AFC, and as well as ovarian hyperstimulation protocols, were all associated with POR. Irrespective of age, PORs in different ovarian hyperstimulation protocol groups had similar AFC, basic sex hormones, number of retrieved oocyte, implantation rate and clinical pregnancy rate as well. However, PORs treated with mild stimulation protocol used least doses of gonadotropins and shortest days of stimulation compared with those treated with other protocols (P<.05). The current study has shown that age, basic FSH, AFC and ovarian stimulation protocols patients used are all significantly associated with POR according to the Bologna criteria. It seems that there is no difference in clinical outcomes such as clinical pregnancy rate, implantation rate and spontaneous abortion rate between different protocols.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bologna criteria; Ovarian hyperstimulation protocol; poor ovarian responder

Year:  2014        PMID: 24955194      PMCID: PMC4057873     

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Clin Exp Med        ISSN: 1940-5901


  18 in total

1.  GnRH agonist versus GnRH antagonist in poor ovarian responders: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  J G Franco; R L R Baruffi; A L Mauri; C G Petersen; V Felipe; J Cornicelli; M Cavagna; J B A Oliveira
Journal:  Reprod Biomed Online       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 3.828

2.  Is there an ideal stimulation regimen for IVF for poor responders and does it change with age?

Authors:  Beverley Vollenhoven; Tiki Osianlis; James Catt
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2008-11-04       Impact factor: 3.412

Review 3.  Interventions for 'poor responders' to controlled ovarian hyper stimulation (COH) in in-vitro fertilisation (IVF).

Authors:  Zabeena Pandian; Alison R McTavish; Lorna Aucott; Mark Pr Hamilton; Siladitya Bhattacharya
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2010-01-20

4.  Comparison of different stimulation protocols efficacy in poor responders undergoing IVF: a retrospective study.

Authors:  Tahereh Madani; Mahnaz Ashrafi; Ladan Mohammadi Yeganeh
Journal:  Gynecol Endocrinol       Date:  2012-02       Impact factor: 2.260

5.  Comparison of a gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist and GnRH agonist flare-up regimen in poor responders undergoing ovarian stimulation.

Authors:  Stefania Malmusi; Antonio La Marca; Simone Giulini; Susanna Xella; Daniela Tagliasacchi; Tiziana Marsella; Annibale Volpe
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2005-08       Impact factor: 7.329

6.  ESHRE consensus on the definition of 'poor response' to ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: the Bologna criteria.

Authors:  A P Ferraretti; A La Marca; B C J M Fauser; B Tarlatzis; G Nargund; L Gianaroli
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2011-04-19       Impact factor: 6.918

7.  GnRH-antagonists in ovarian stimulation for IVF in patients with poor response to gonadotrophins, polycystic ovary syndrome, and risk of ovarian hyperstimulation: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  G Griesinger; K Diedrich; B C Tarlatzis; E M Kolibianakis
Journal:  Reprod Biomed Online       Date:  2006-11       Impact factor: 3.828

8.  Comparison of microdose flare-up and antagonist multiple-dose protocols for poor-responder patients: a randomized study.

Authors:  Aygul Demirol; Timur Gurgan
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2008-11-05       Impact factor: 7.329

9.  Live birth rates following natural cycle IVF in women with poor ovarian response according to the Bologna criteria.

Authors:  N P Polyzos; C Blockeel; W Verpoest; M De Vos; D Stoop; V Vloeberghs; M Camus; P Devroey; H Tournaye
Journal:  Hum Reprod       Date:  2012-08-30       Impact factor: 6.918

10.  Human menopausal gonadotropin/human chorionic gonadotropin follicular maturation for oocyte aspiration: phase II, 1981.

Authors:  J E Garcia; G S Jones; A A Acosta; G Wright
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  1983-02       Impact factor: 7.329

View more
  11 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.  Reproductive Outcomes of Single Embryo Transfer in Women with Previous Cesarean Section.

Authors:  Ting Chen; Bo Li; Hao Shi; Zhi Qin Bu; Fu Qing Zhang; Ying Chun Su
Journal:  Reprod Sci       Date:  2020-10-13       Impact factor: 3.060

3.  The Impact of Endometrial Thickness on the Day of Human Chorionic Gonadotrophin (hCG) Administration on Ongoing Pregnancy Rate in Patients with Different Ovarian Response.

Authors:  Zhiqin Bu; Yingpu Sun
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2015-12-30       Impact factor: 3.240

4.  Influence of endometrial thickness on treatment outcomes following in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection.

Authors:  Ning-Zhao Ma; Lei Chen; Wei Dai; Zhi-Qin Bu; Lin-Li Hu; Ying-Pu Sun
Journal:  Reprod Biol Endocrinol       Date:  2017-01-05       Impact factor: 5.211

Review 5.  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

6.  Luteal phase stimulation versus follicular phase stimulation in poor ovarian responders: results of a randomized controlled trial.

Authors:  Joaquín Llácer; Belén Moliner; Lydia Luque; Andrea Bernabéu; Belén Lledó; Juan Carlos Castillo; Jaime Guerrero; Jorge Ten; Rafael Bernabéu
Journal:  Reprod Biol Endocrinol       Date:  2020-02-07       Impact factor: 5.211

7.  Risk Factors of Recurrent Ectopic Pregnancy in Patients Treated With in vitro Fertilization Cycles: A Matched Case-Control Study.

Authors:  Yu Tan; Zhi-Qin Bu; Hao Shi; Hui Song; Yi-le Zhang
Journal:  Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)       Date:  2020-09-18       Impact factor: 5.555

8.  Amphiregulin mediates hCG-induced StAR expression and progesterone production in human granulosa cells.

Authors:  Lanlan Fang; Yiping Yu; Ruizhe Zhang; Jingyan He; Ying-Pu Sun
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2016-04-26       Impact factor: 4.379

9.  Comparison Pregnancy Outcomes Between Minimal Stimulation Protocol and Conventional GnRH Antagonist Protocols in Poor Ovarian Responders.

Authors:  Shamim Pilehvari; Ensieh ShahrokhTehraninejad; Batool Hosseinrashidi; Fatemeh Keikhah; Fedyeh Haghollahi; Elham Aziminekoo
Journal:  J Family Reprod Health       Date:  2016-03

Review 10.  The POSEIDON stratification - moving from poor ovarian response to low prognosis.

Authors:  Matheus Roque; Thor Haahr; Sandro C Esteves; Peter Humaidan
Journal:  JBRA Assist Reprod       Date:  2021-04-27
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.