BACKGROUND: Ovarian stimulation with clomiphene (CC) or progestin has been applied for patients with diminished ovarian reserve (DOR). However, it remains unclear which treatment confers greater benefits. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) protocol vs CC-primed ovarian stimulation (CPOS) in infertile women with DOR. METHODS: A before-and-after self-controlled study was conducted to retrospectively investigate the data from 50 infertile women with DOR, who failed to conceive in their first in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection-frozen embryo transfer cycle when stimulated with CPOS, and switched to PPOS, in the Reproductive Medicine Center of Changzhou Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital. RESULTS: Our results showed that PPOS significantly suppressed the luteinizing hormone (LH) surge and yielded more satisfactory results in patients with DOR, including increased number of retrieved oocytes, MII mature oocytes, normal fertilized oocytes, cleaved embryos, high-grade embryos, cryopreserved embryos, pregnancy rate, live-birth rate, and decreased miscarriage rates. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated that compared with CPOS protocol, PPOS protocol could not only suppress the LH surge but also improved the quantity, particularly the quality of oocytes in patients with DOR, suggesting that PPOS treatment is more effective than CPOS for patients with DOR.
BACKGROUND: Ovarian stimulation with clomiphene (CC) or progestin has been applied for patients with diminished ovarian reserve (DOR). However, it remains unclear which treatment confers greater benefits. This study aimed to compare the outcomes of progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) protocol vs CC-primed ovarian stimulation (CPOS) in infertile women with DOR. METHODS: A before-and-after self-controlled study was conducted to retrospectively investigate the data from 50 infertile women with DOR, who failed to conceive in their first in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection-frozen embryo transfer cycle when stimulated with CPOS, and switched to PPOS, in the Reproductive Medicine Center of Changzhou Maternal and Child Health Care Hospital. RESULTS: Our results showed that PPOS significantly suppressed the luteinizing hormone (LH) surge and yielded more satisfactory results in patients with DOR, including increased number of retrieved oocytes, MII mature oocytes, normal fertilized oocytes, cleaved embryos, high-grade embryos, cryopreserved embryos, pregnancy rate, live-birth rate, and decreased miscarriage rates. CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrated that compared with CPOS protocol, PPOS protocol could not only suppress the LH surge but also improved the quantity, particularly the quality of oocytes in patients with DOR, suggesting that PPOS treatment is more effective than CPOS for patients with DOR.