OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the outcome of oocytes donated by women with polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) compared with oocytes donated by women with mechanical infertility. DESIGN: A retrospective study. PATIENTS: The outcome of 159 oocyte donation cycles with oocyte donated by PCOS patients were compared with 69 oocyte donation cycles with oocytes donated by patients with mechanical infertility. We compared the stimulation protocols in the donors to assess if the combination of GnRH analogue (GnRH-a), FSH, and hMG has an advantage over FSH and hMG alone with respect to their effect on fertilization and implantation rates in oocyte donation cycles. RESULTS: When treated with GnRH-a, pregnancy rates in PCOS and mechanical infertility donors were higher than those treated with FSH and hMG alone. The comparison between PCOS and mechanical factor oocyte recipients revealed no significant difference in the pregnancy and abortion rates, but the oocytes of patients with PCOS that were exposed to GnRH-a had a significantly higher implantation rate than those not exposed to GnRH-a. CONCLUSIONS: Oocytes obtained from PCOS patients had a fertilization potential equal to oocytes obtained from mechanical infertility donors. Furthermore, because the oocytes of patients with PCOS exposed to GnRH-a had a significantly higher implantation rate, a detrimental role of high LH on oocyte quality seems probable. However, because PCOS has a high familial prevalence, some reservations may arise due to a possible propagation of the problem in the next generation of oocyte donation programs.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the outcome of oocytes donated by women with polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) compared with oocytes donated by women with mechanical infertility. DESIGN: A retrospective study. PATIENTS: The outcome of 159 oocyte donation cycles with oocyte donated by PCOSpatients were compared with 69 oocyte donation cycles with oocytes donated by patients with mechanical infertility. We compared the stimulation protocols in the donors to assess if the combination of GnRH analogue (GnRH-a), FSH, and hMG has an advantage over FSH and hMG alone with respect to their effect on fertilization and implantation rates in oocyte donation cycles. RESULTS: When treated with GnRH-a, pregnancy rates in PCOS and mechanical infertility donors were higher than those treated with FSH and hMG alone. The comparison between PCOS and mechanical factor oocyte recipients revealed no significant difference in the pregnancy and abortion rates, but the oocytes of patients with PCOS that were exposed to GnRH-a had a significantly higher implantation rate than those not exposed to GnRH-a. CONCLUSIONS: Oocytes obtained from PCOSpatients had a fertilization potential equal to oocytes obtained from mechanical infertility donors. Furthermore, because the oocytes of patients with PCOS exposed to GnRH-a had a significantly higher implantation rate, a detrimental role of high LH on oocyte quality seems probable. However, because PCOS has a high familial prevalence, some reservations may arise due to a possible propagation of the problem in the next generation of oocyte donation programs.