Nan fang yi ke da xue xue bao = Journal of Southern Medical University · 2014
[Clinical outcomes and economic analysis of two ovulation induction protocols in patients undergoing repeated IVF/ICSI cycles].
Сравнительное исследованиеАннотация на английскомСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Chen Xiao, Geng Ling, Li Hong
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare the clinical outcomes and cost-effectiveness of luteal phase down-regulation with gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist protocol and GnRH antagonist protocol in patients undergoing repeated in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF-ICSI) cycles.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis of clinical outcomes and costs was conducted among 198 patients undergoing repeated IVF-ICSI cycles, including 109 receiving luteal phase down-regulation with GnRH agonist protocol (group A) and 89 receiving GnRH antagonist protocol (group B). The numbers of oocytes retrieved and good embryos, clinical pregnancy rate, abortion rate, the live birth rate, mean total cost, and the cost-effective ratio were compared between the two groups.
RESULTS: In patients undergoing repeated IVF-ICSI cycles, the two protocols produced no significant differences in the number of good embryos, clinical pregnancy rate, abortion rate, or twin pregnancy rate. Compared with group B, group A had better clinical outcomes though this difference was not statistically significant. The number of retrieved oocytes was significantly greater and live birth rate significantly higher in group A than in group B (9.13=4.98 vs 7.11=4.74, and 20.2% vs 9.0%, respectively). Compared with group B, group A had higher mean total cost per cycle but lower costs for each oocyte retrieved (2729.11 vs 3038.60 RMB yuan), each good embryo (8867.19 vs 9644.85 RMB yuan), each clinical pregnancy (77598.06 vs 96139.85 RMB yuan).
CONCLUSION: For patients undergoing repeated IVF/ICSI cycle, luteal phase down-regulation with GnRH agonist protocol produces good clinical outcomes with also good cost-effectiveness in spite an unsatisfactory ovarian reserve.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis of clinical outcomes and costs was conducted among 198 patients undergoing repeated IVF-ICSI cycles, including 109 receiving luteal phase down-regulation with GnRH agonist protocol (group A) and 89 receiving GnRH antagonist protocol (group B). The numbers of oocytes retrieved and good embryos, clinical pregnancy rate, abortion rate, the live birth rate, mean total cost, and the cost-effective ratio were compared between the two groups.
RESULTS: In patients undergoing repeated IVF-ICSI cycles, the two protocols produced no significant differences in the number of good embryos, clinical pregnancy rate, abortion rate, or twin pregnancy rate. Compared with group B, group A had better clinical outcomes though this difference was not statistically significant. The number of retrieved oocytes was significantly greater and live birth rate significantly higher in group A than in group B (9.13=4.98 vs 7.11=4.74, and 20.2% vs 9.0%, respectively). Compared with group B, group A had higher mean total cost per cycle but lower costs for each oocyte retrieved (2729.11 vs 3038.60 RMB yuan), each good embryo (8867.19 vs 9644.85 RMB yuan), each clinical pregnancy (77598.06 vs 96139.85 RMB yuan).
CONCLUSION: For patients undergoing repeated IVF/ICSI cycle, luteal phase down-regulation with GnRH agonist protocol produces good clinical outcomes with also good cost-effectiveness in spite an unsatisfactory ovarian reserve.