Zhe Dong1, Ling Sun2, Hanwang Zhang3, Zhiheng Chen1, Yuehong Jian1. 1. Reproductive Medicine Center, Guangzhou Women and Children's Medical Center, No. 9, Jinsui Road, Guangzhou 510623, Guangdong, People's Republic of China. 2. Reproductive Medicine Center, Guangzhou Women and Children's Medical Center, No. 9, Jinsui Road, Guangzhou 510623, Guangdong, People's Republic of China. Electronic address: sunling2009@hotmail.com. 3. Reproductive Medicine Center, Tongji Hospital, Tongji Medical College, Huazhong University of Science and Technology, Wuhan 430030, The People's Republic of China.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To compare the reproductive outcomes of frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) in nature cycle utilizing monitoring ovulation regimen (MOR) and monitoring progesterone (P) level regimen (MPR). STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective analysis of records of 224 women who received FET procedures. RESULT(S): MPR was used in 60.3% (135/224) of cycles and MOR in 39.7% (89/224) of cycles. The clinical pregnancy rate per transfer was 63.0% in the MPR group and 48.3% in the MOR group (p=0.030). The implantation rates were 42.6% and 35.1%, respectively (p=0.001). The ongoing pregnancy rates per transfer (at 12 weeks' gestation) were 54.1% and 41.6%, respectively (p>0.05). A logistic regression analysis showed that the type of natural cycle regimen was a predictor of clinical pregnancy rate (odds ratio, 1.996; 95% confidence interval, 1.123-3.549; p=0.019). Other significant variables affecting clinical pregnancy rate was number of top-quality embryos transferred. CONCLUSION(S): Performing FET using MPR could achieve higher clinical pregnancy rate compared with MOR in a group of patients with the comparable demographic and cycle characteristics profile.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the reproductive outcomes of frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) in nature cycle utilizing monitoring ovulation regimen (MOR) and monitoring progesterone (P) level regimen (MPR). STUDY DESIGN: A retrospective analysis of records of 224 women who received FET procedures. RESULT(S): MPR was used in 60.3% (135/224) of cycles and MOR in 39.7% (89/224) of cycles. The clinical pregnancy rate per transfer was 63.0% in the MPR group and 48.3% in the MOR group (p=0.030). The implantation rates were 42.6% and 35.1%, respectively (p=0.001). The ongoing pregnancy rates per transfer (at 12 weeks' gestation) were 54.1% and 41.6%, respectively (p>0.05). A logistic regression analysis showed that the type of natural cycle regimen was a predictor of clinical pregnancy rate (odds ratio, 1.996; 95% confidence interval, 1.123-3.549; p=0.019). Other significant variables affecting clinical pregnancy rate was number of top-quality embryos transferred. CONCLUSION(S): Performing FET using MPR could achieve higher clinical pregnancy rate compared with MOR in a group of patients with the comparable demographic and cycle characteristics profile.
Authors: Marjan Omidi; Iman Halvaei; Fatemeh Akyash; Mohammad Ali Khalili; Azam Agha-Rahimi; Leila Heydari Journal: Int J Reprod Biomed Date: 2021-03-21