Literature DB >> 32211953

Mild stimulation protocol vs conventional controlled ovarian stimulation protocol in poor ovarian response patients: a prospective randomized controlled trial.

Xiaoping Liu1, Tingting Li1, Bo Wang1, Xuefen Xiao1, Xiaoyan Liang1, Rui Huang2.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: To compare the efficacy of mild ovarian stimulation protocol and conventional controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) protocol for poor ovarian response (POR) patients undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF)/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI).
METHODS: This single-center prospective randomized controlled trial conducted from September 2013 to September 2015, including 191 patients who met the Bologna criteria of POR. Ninety-seven patients allocated to the mild ovarian stimulation group (MS group) were stimulated according to the letrozole/antagonist protocol, while 94 patients in the controlled ovarian stimulation group (COS group) were stimulated according to a high dose of gonadotropin (Gn) combined with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) stop protocol. The cumulative live birth rate was the primary outcome. Chinese clinical trial number ChiCTR-TRC-13003454.
RESULTS: Comparing with the COS group, both the stimulation duration and the total gonadotropin dose were significantly shorter and lower in the MS group (P < 0.001). A higher number of retrieved oocytes (P = 0.003) and transferrable embryos (P = 0.029) were obtained in the COS group. The cumulative live birth rates (OR 1.103; 95% CI 0.53 to 2.28; P = 0.791) were comparable between the two groups.
CONCLUSIONS: The increase of Gn dose during ovulation stimulation was associated with a higher number of transferrable embryos for POR patients, but this increase did not lead to a concomitant improvement of reproductive outcome, especially in terms of the cumulative live birth rate. Using a mild stimulation protocol was economically preferential while it was as effective as higher doses of Gn stimulation protocol in reproductive outcome for POR patients.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Conventional controlled ovarian stimulation; Cumulative live birth rate; Mild ovarian stimulation; Poor ovarian response; Randomized controlled trial

Year:  2020        PMID: 32211953     DOI: 10.1007/s00404-020-05513-6

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet        ISSN: 0932-0067            Impact factor:   2.344


  9 in total

Review 1.  Ovarian stimulation protocols for poor ovarian responders: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Authors:  Man Di; Xiaohong Wang; Jing Wu; Hongya Yang
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2022-06-11       Impact factor: 2.344

2.  Analysis of Factors Associated With Recurrence of Early-Stage Endometrial Carcinoma and Atypical Endometrial Hyperplasia in Infertile Women After In Vitro Fertilization Treatment.

Authors:  Yaxing Guo; Xuan Zong; Hongzhen Li; Jie Qiao
Journal:  Front Oncol       Date:  2022-06-27       Impact factor: 5.738

3.  A flexible short protocol in women with poor ovarian response over 40 years old.

Authors:  Xinyue Zhang; Ting Feng; Jihong Yang; Yingying Hao; Suying Li; Yan Zhang; Yun Qian
Journal:  J Ovarian Res       Date:  2021-01-05       Impact factor: 4.234

4.  AMH has no role in predicting oocyte quality in women with advanced age undergoing IVF/ICSI cycles.

Authors:  Xiuliang Dai; Yufeng Wang; Haiyan Yang; Tingting Gao; Chunmei Yu; Fang Cao; Xiyang Xia; Jun Wu; Xianju Zhou; Li Chen
Journal:  Sci Rep       Date:  2020-11-12       Impact factor: 4.379

5.  A Feasible Option before Cycle Cancellation for Poor Responders; STOP-START Protocol.

Authors:  Cem Somer Atabekoğlu; Yavuz Emre Şükür; Batuhan Özmen; Murat Sönmezer; Bülent Berker; Ruşen Aytaç
Journal:  Int J Fertil Steril       Date:  2021-10-16

6.  Comparative analyses in transcriptome of human granulosa cells and follicular fluid micro-environment between poor ovarian responders with conventional controlled ovarian or mild ovarian stimulations.

Authors:  Xiaoping Liu; Huisi Mai; Panyu Chen; Zhiqiang Zhang; Taibao Wu; Jianhui Chen; Peng Sun; Chuanchuan Zhou; Xiaoyan Liang; Rui Huang
Journal:  Reprod Biol Endocrinol       Date:  2022-03-21       Impact factor: 5.211

Review 7.  Prospects of Germline Nuclear Transfer in Women With Diminished Ovarian Reserve.

Authors:  Antonia Christodoulaki; Annekatrien Boel; Maoxing Tang; Chloë De Roo; Dominic Stoop; Björn Heindryckx
Journal:  Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)       Date:  2021-02-22       Impact factor: 5.555

8.  Mild versus conventional ovarian stimulation for IVF in poor, normal and hyper-responders: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Adrija Kumar Datta; Abha Maheshwari; Nirmal Felix; Stuart Campbell; Geeta Nargund
Journal:  Hum Reprod Update       Date:  2021-02-19       Impact factor: 15.610

9.  Controlled ovarian hyperstimulation for poor ovarian responders undergoing in vitro fertilisation/intracytoplasmic sperm injection: a protocol for systematic review and Bayesian network meta-analysis.

Authors:  Huisheng Yang; Chensi Zheng; Qiyan Zheng; Huanfang Xu; Xiaotong Li; Mingzhao Hao; Yigong Fang
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2021-02-23       Impact factor: 2.692

  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.