Yomna A Bayoumi1, Dina M R Dakhly2, Yasmin A Bassiouny2, Nawara M Hashish2. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt. Electronic address: dryomnabayoumi@gmail.com. 2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Cairo University, Cairo, Egypt.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of adding growth hormone (GH) to the microflare stimulation protocol among women with poor ovarian response. METHODS: A parallel, open-label, randomized controlled trial was conducted among patients with poor ovarian response who attended a center in Cairo, Egypt, between July 10 and December 31, 2014. Participants were randomly assigned using a computer program (random block size of 4-8) to undergo the microflare protocol with or without GH. Primary outcomes were the mean numbers of mature oocytes retrieved and fertilized. Analyses were done per protocol: women with cycle cancellations were excluded. RESULTS: The analysis included 72 women in the GH group and 73 in the microflare only group. The mean number of oocytes collected was 7.2±1.5 in the GH group versus 4.7±1.2 in the microflare only group (P<0.001). The mean number of metaphase II oocytes was 5.2±1.2 in the GH group and 2.8±1.0 in the microflare only group (P<0.001). The mean number of fertilized oocytes was higher in the GH group (4.2±1.1) than in the microflare only group (2.5±0.7; P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Addition of GH to the microflare stimulation protocol provided some potential benefits to women with poor ovarian response. However, further studies are required before it could be recommended for routine clinical use. ClinicalTrials.gov:NCT02185326.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To assess the efficacy of adding growth hormone (GH) to the microflare stimulation protocol among women with poor ovarian response. METHODS: A parallel, open-label, randomized controlled trial was conducted among patients with poor ovarian response who attended a center in Cairo, Egypt, between July 10 and December 31, 2014. Participants were randomly assigned using a computer program (random block size of 4-8) to undergo the microflare protocol with or without GH. Primary outcomes were the mean numbers of mature oocytes retrieved and fertilized. Analyses were done per protocol: women with cycle cancellations were excluded. RESULTS: The analysis included 72 women in the GH group and 73 in the microflare only group. The mean number of oocytes collected was 7.2±1.5 in the GH group versus 4.7±1.2 in the microflare only group (P<0.001). The mean number of metaphase II oocytes was 5.2±1.2 in the GH group and 2.8±1.0 in the microflare only group (P<0.001). The mean number of fertilized oocytes was higher in the GH group (4.2±1.1) than in the microflare only group (2.5±0.7; P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Addition of GH to the microflare stimulation protocol provided some potential benefits to women with poor ovarian response. However, further studies are required before it could be recommended for routine clinical use. ClinicalTrials.gov:NCT02185326.
Authors: Kevin N Keane; Peter M Hinchliffe; Philip K Rowlands; Gayatri Borude; Shanti Srinivasan; Satvinder S Dhaliwal; John L Yovich Journal: Front Endocrinol (Lausanne) Date: 2018-01-31 Impact factor: 5.555