| Literature DB >> 35368963 |
Lingqin Chen1, Mindong Lai2, Xiaojin Huang1, Fang Zeng1, Wei Xia1, Qingping Yang1, Sisun Liu3.
Abstract
Objective: To explore the clinical efficacy of assisted reproductive technology (ART) combined with progesterone capsules in the treatment of infertility caused by the diminished ovarian reserve (DOR) and its influence on serum FSH, E2, and LH levels of patients.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35368963 PMCID: PMC8970857 DOI: 10.1155/2022/5319172
Source DB: PubMed Journal: J Healthc Eng ISSN: 2040-2295 Impact factor: 2.682
Figure 1Comparison of ovarian-related indexes (Note: in Figure 1, the abscissa was before and after treatment from left to right, respectively. The black area indicated the experimental group, and the gray area indicated the control group. # indicated P < 0.001). (a) PI. No significant difference was found in PI between both groups before treatment (1.49 ± 0.21 vs 1.50 ± 0.23, P > 0.05). After treatment, compared with the control group, PI of the experimental group was obviously higher (2.34 ± 0.35 vs 1.87 ± 0.25, P < 0.001). (b) RI. No significant difference was found in RI between both groups before treatment (0.90 ± 0.11 vs 0.91 ± 0.12, P > 0.05). After treatment, compared with the control group, RI of the experimental group was obviously lower (0.68 ± 0.10 vs 0.78 ± 0.12, P < 0.001). (c) OAV. No significant difference was found in OAV between both groups before treatment (3.98 ± 0.35 vs 3.96 ± 0.36, P > 0.05). After treatment, compared with the control group, OAV of the experimental group was obviously higher (6.05 ± 0.45 vs 5.10 ± 0.45, P < 0.001). (d) S/D. No significant difference was found in S/D between both groups before treatment (3.00 ± 0.24 vs 3.02 ± 0.28, P > 0.05). After treatment, compared with the control group, S/D of the experimental group was obviously lower (2.10 ± 0.12 vs 2.58 ± 0.20, P < 0.001). (e) PSV. No significant difference was found in PSV between both groups before treatment (0.79 ± 0.15 vs 0.78 ± 0.14, P > 0.05). After treatment, compared with the control group, PSV of the experimental group was obviously higher (2.29 ± 0.20 vs 1.85 ± 0.23, P < 0.001). (f) Thickness of endometrium. No significant difference was found in the thickness of the endometrium between both groups before treatment (3.55 ± 0.14 vs 3.59 ± 0.15, P > 0.05). After treatment, compared with the control group, the thickness of the endometrium of the experimental group was obviously higher (5.01 ± 0.26 vs 4.66 ± 0.19, P < 0.001).
Comparison of follicular development .
| Group | Experimental group ( | Control group ( |
|
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Days of ovulation induction (d) | 18.21 ± 3.21 | 12.54 ± 3.41 | 9.378 | <0.001 |
| Number of M-II oocytes | ||||
| Total | 210 | 180 | ||
| Average | 5.10 ± 1.11 | 3.54 ± 1.23 | 7.293 | <0.001 |
| Number of fertilized M-II oocytes | 3.98 ± 0.65 | 3.00 ± 0.54 | 8.983 | <0.001 |
| Antraol follicle count | 4.35 ± 0.41 | 3.10 ± 0.35 | 17.961 | <0.001 |
| Thickness of endometrium on the day of ovulation (mm) | 10.10 ± 1.26 | 8.00 ± 1.35 | 8.809 | <0.001 |
| Number of high-quality embryos | 1.85 ± 0.35 | 1.10 ± 0.23 | 13.871 | <0.001 |
| Gn dosage (U) | 1765.68 ± 554.21 | 2298.65 ± 558.65 | 5.246 | <0.001 |
Comparison of serum hormone levels .
| Indexes | Experimental group | Control group |
|
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| FSH | Before treatment | 20.10 ± 3.54 | Before treatment | 20.54 ± 3.21 | 0.713 | 0.477 |
| (U/L) | After treatment | 5.99 ± 1.20 | After treatment | 10.22 ± 2.54 | 11.664 | <0.001 |
|
| 29.240 |
| 19.529 | |||
|
| <0.001 |
| <0.001 | |||
|
| ||||||
| E2 | Before treatment | 100.65 ± 6.98 | Before treatment | 101.68 ± 6.12 | 0.859 | 0.392 |
| (ng/L) | After treatment | 40.12 ± 3.54 | After treatment | 49.68 ± 3.68 | 14.502 | <0.001 |
|
| 59.908 |
| 46.404 | |||
|
| <0.001 |
| <0.001 | |||
|
| ||||||
| LH | Before treatment | 16.45 ± 2.54 | Before treatment | 16.87 ± 2.58 | 0.899 | 0.371 |
| (U/L) | After treatment | 3.10 ± 0.35 | After treatment | 7.98 ± 1.23 | 29.559 | <0.001 |
|
| 40.331 |
| 24.093 | |||
|
| <0.001 |
| <0.001 | |||
Figure 2Comparison of pregnancy outcomes (n (%)). (Note: in Figures (a, b, c), the experimental group was on the left, and the control group was on the right. # indicated P < 0.001. (a) Clinical pregnancy rate. The black area was pregnancy, and the gray area was not pregnancy. Compared with the control group, clinical pregnancy rate of the experimental group was obviously higher (35 vs 24, P < 0.05). (b) Abortion rate. The black area was abortion, and the gray area was not abortion. Compared with the control group, abortion rate of the experimental group was obviously lower (4 vs 8, P < 0.05). (c) Multiple births rate. The black area was multiple births, and the gray area was single birth, with no significant difference in multiple births rate (6 vs 4, P > 0.05)).