Literature DB >> 8195335

A double-blind cross-over controlled study to evaluate the effect of human biosynthetic growth hormone on ovarian stimulation in previous poor responders to in-vitro fertilization.

S M Hughes1, Z H Huang, I D Morris, P L Matson, P Buck, B A Lieberman.   

Abstract

The effect of exogenous human biosynthetic growth hormone (HGH; 12 IU/day; Norditropin, Novo-Nordisk) on the response to ovarian stimulation using a buserelin/human menopausal gonadotrophin (HMG) regimen was assessed in women who had previously shown a 'poor response' in spite of increasing doses of HMG. Forty patients were recruited into a prospective double-blind placebo-controlled study. The serum follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) on day 2-5 of a menstrual cycle (< 10 IU/l) was used to exclude any peri-menopausal candidates. The urinary 24 h GH secretion was normal in all patients. Thirty-three patients completed the study with 21 patients having human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG) in both arms, thus providing a complete set of placebo control data. Of these 21 patients, the administration of HGH compared to the placebo cycle resulted in increased serum concentrations of fasting insulin on the 8th (median 3.9 versus 5.8 mU/l; P < 0.0005) and 13th (median 4.4 versus 5.8 mU/l; P < 0.05) day of HMG in those cycles receiving HGH. After 8 days of co-treatment with HGH the number of cohort follicles (14-16.9 mm) was significantly increased, but this change was not sustained on the day of HCG administration. No statistical difference in the serum oestradiol on the 8th day of HMG or day of HCG, length of the follicular phase, total dose of HMG used, or the number of oocytes collected was seen between the placebo or HGH cycles. This study demonstrates that HGH does not improve the ovarian response to ovulation induction in previous poor responders.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1994        PMID: 8195335     DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a138301

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Reprod        ISSN: 0268-1161            Impact factor:   6.918


  12 in total

1.  Gonadotropins and glucocorticoid therapy for "low responders"--a controlled study.

Authors:  D Bider; J Blankstein; J Levron; I Tur-Kaspa
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  1997-07       Impact factor: 3.412

2.  Follicular fluid insulin-like growth factor-I and insulin-like growth factor-binding protein-1 and -3 vary as a function of ovarian reserve and ovarian stimulation.

Authors:  L Stadtmauer; A Vidali; S R Lindheim; M V Sauer
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  1998-11       Impact factor: 3.412

3.  The place of cotreatment with growth hormone and human menopausal gonadotropin (hMG) in ovarian stimulation.

Authors:  R Homburg; Z Ben-Rafael
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  1996-05       Impact factor: 3.412

Review 4.  Growth hormone cotreatment with gonadotropins in ovulation induction.

Authors:  P G Artini; A A de Micheroux; G D'Ambrogio
Journal:  J Endocrinol Invest       Date:  1996-12       Impact factor: 4.256

Review 5.  Evaluation and treatment of low responders in assisted reproductive technology: a challenge to meet.

Authors:  S J Fasouliotis; A Simon; N Laufer
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2000-08       Impact factor: 3.412

Review 6.  Growth hormone for in vitro fertilization.

Authors:  James Mn Duffy; Gaity Ahmad; Lamiya Mohiyiddeen; Luciano G Nardo; Andrew Watson
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2010-01-20

Review 7.  Different ovarian stimulation protocols for women with diminished ovarian reserve.

Authors:  D Loutradis; P Drakakis; E Vomvolaki; A Antsaklis
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2007-11-22       Impact factor: 3.412

8.  Growth hormone co-treatment within a GnRH agonist long protocol in patients with poor ovarian response: a prospective, randomized, clinical trial.

Authors:  Tansu Kucuk; Hakan Kozinoglu; Ayten Kaba
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2008-04       Impact factor: 3.412

9.  Decreased fertility in poor responder women is not related to oocyte morphological status.

Authors:  Marcílio Nichi; Rita de Cassia Sávio Figueira; Daniela Paes de Almeida Ferreira Braga; Amanda Souza Setti; Assumpto Iaconelli; Edson Borges
Journal:  Arch Med Sci       Date:  2011-05-17       Impact factor: 3.318

Review 10.  Biological versus chronological ovarian age: implications for assisted reproductive technology.

Authors:  Carlo Alviggi; Peter Humaidan; Colin M Howles; Donald Tredway; Stephen G Hillier
Journal:  Reprod Biol Endocrinol       Date:  2009-09-22       Impact factor: 5.211

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.