Anna L M Souza1, Marcos Sampaio2, Graciele B Noronha1, Ludiana G R Coster1, Roberta S G de Oliveira1, Selmo Geber3,4. 1. UFMG - Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Av. Alfredo Balena, 190, Belo Horizonte, MG, CEP 30130100, Brazil. 2. ORIGEN - Center for Reproductive Medicine, Av. Contorno 7747 - Lourdes, Belo Horizonte, MG, CEP 30110-120, Brazil. 3. UFMG - Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Av. Alfredo Balena, 190, Belo Horizonte, MG, CEP 30130100, Brazil. selmogeber@origen.com.br. 4. ORIGEN - Center for Reproductive Medicine, Av. Contorno 7747 - Lourdes, Belo Horizonte, MG, CEP 30110-120, Brazil. selmogeber@origen.com.br.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to investigate the impact of follicular flushing on the number of oocytes retrieved, oocyte maturity, fertilization rate, embryo development, and pregnancy rate of poor ovarian responders (POR). METHODS: Retrospective study of 524 cycles of 384 patients with POR submitted to assisted reproductive technology (ART) and who had follicular flushing during oocyte retrieval was used in the study. We included patients with <5 oocytes at oocyte retrieval (POR group) and matching the Bologna criteria. RESULTS: POR patients had a mean age of 38.2 ± 4.2 years. A total of 1355 follicles (mean = 3.5 ± 1.6) were aspirated and 1040 oocytes recovered, with 709 (68.2%) obtained by direct aspiration and 331 (31.8%) by follicular flushing. We found a difference between the total number of oocytes and the number of aspirated oocytes. Overall pregnancy rate was 22%. Association was observed between pregnancy rate and the number of oocytes retrieved, the number of MII oocytes, and the number of embryos transferred. The patients matching the Bologna criteria had a mean age of 38.9 ± 3.9 years. A total of 309 follicles were aspirated (mean = 3.1 ± 1.5) and 242 oocytes recovered, with 156 (64.5%) obtained by direct aspiration and 86 (35.5%) by follicular flushing. There was a significant difference between the total number of oocytes and the number of aspirated oocytes. Overall pregnancy rate was 12.1%. There was no association between the pregnancy rate and the number of oocytes retrieved, the number of MII, and the number of embryos. CONCLUSIONS: Follicular flushing might be a suitable alternative to increase the number of oocytes and pregnancy rates in patients with POR.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study is to investigate the impact of follicular flushing on the number of oocytes retrieved, oocyte maturity, fertilization rate, embryo development, and pregnancy rate of poor ovarian responders (POR). METHODS: Retrospective study of 524 cycles of 384 patients with POR submitted to assisted reproductive technology (ART) and who had follicular flushing during oocyte retrieval was used in the study. We included patients with <5 oocytes at oocyte retrieval (POR group) and matching the Bologna criteria. RESULTS: POR patients had a mean age of 38.2 ± 4.2 years. A total of 1355 follicles (mean = 3.5 ± 1.6) were aspirated and 1040 oocytes recovered, with 709 (68.2%) obtained by direct aspiration and 331 (31.8%) by follicular flushing. We found a difference between the total number of oocytes and the number of aspirated oocytes. Overall pregnancy rate was 22%. Association was observed between pregnancy rate and the number of oocytes retrieved, the number of MII oocytes, and the number of embryos transferred. The patients matching the Bologna criteria had a mean age of 38.9 ± 3.9 years. A total of 309 follicles were aspirated (mean = 3.1 ± 1.5) and 242 oocytes recovered, with 156 (64.5%) obtained by direct aspiration and 86 (35.5%) by follicular flushing. There was a significant difference between the total number of oocytes and the number of aspirated oocytes. Overall pregnancy rate was 12.1%. There was no association between the pregnancy rate and the number of oocytes retrieved, the number of MII, and the number of embryos. CONCLUSIONS:Follicular flushing might be a suitable alternative to increase the number of oocytes and pregnancy rates in patients with POR.
Authors: Gary Levy; Micah J Hill; Christina I Ramirez; Luiz Correa; Mary E Ryan; Alan H DeCherney; Eric D Levens; Brian W Whitcomb Journal: Hum Reprod Date: 2012-05-30 Impact factor: 6.918
Authors: Marcelo Marinho de Souza; Ana Cristina Allemand Mancebo; Maria do Carmo Borges de Souza; Roberto de Azevedo Antunes; Ana Luiza Barbeitas; Verônica de Almeida Raupp; Layna Almeida Barbosa da Silva; Flávia Siqueira; Ana Luisa Bruno Marinho de Souza Journal: JBRA Assist Reprod Date: 2021-04-27
Authors: A S Kohl Schwartz; I Calzaferri; M Roumet; A Limacher; A Fink; A Wueest; S Weidlinger; V R Mitter; B Leeners; M Von Wolff Journal: Hum Reprod Date: 2020-10-01 Impact factor: 6.918