The Journal of reproductive medicine · 2015
Estradiol and Antagonist Pretreatment Prior to Microdose Leuprolide in in Vitro Fertilization. Does It Improve IVF Outcomes in Poor Responders as Compared to Oral Contraceptive Pill?
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Elassar Alyaa, Nulsen John, Engmann Lawrence, Benadiva Claudio
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare in vitro fertilization (IVF) outcomes in low responders stimulated with microdose leuprolide protocol (ML) following pretreatment with either oral contraceptive pill (OCP) or luteal estradiol (E2) + GnRH antagonist (E2 + antag) for follicular synchronization prior to controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH).
STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective study of 130 women, who were poor responders, undergoing IVF with either OCP/ML or E2+ antag/ML protocols. The main outcome measures were ongoing pregnancy rates, number of oocytes retrieved, and cancellation rate.
RESULTS: Both groups were similar in baseline characteristics. There were no significant differences in gonadotropin requirement, cancellation rate, and number of embryos transferred. Ongoing pregnancy rates (40% vs. 15%) were significantly higher in the OCP/ML group. Trends toward greater number of oocytes retrieved (7.7 ± 3.4 vs. 5.9 ± 4.2) and improved implantation rates (20% vs. 12%) were also noted, but these did not reach statistical significance.
CONCLUSION: E2+antag pretreatment does not appear to improve IVF outcomes in ML protocol when compared to the standard OCP in poor responders. Randomized trials with adequate power to study the optimal method of steroid pretreatments appear justified.
STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective study of 130 women, who were poor responders, undergoing IVF with either OCP/ML or E2+ antag/ML protocols. The main outcome measures were ongoing pregnancy rates, number of oocytes retrieved, and cancellation rate.
RESULTS: Both groups were similar in baseline characteristics. There were no significant differences in gonadotropin requirement, cancellation rate, and number of embryos transferred. Ongoing pregnancy rates (40% vs. 15%) were significantly higher in the OCP/ML group. Trends toward greater number of oocytes retrieved (7.7 ± 3.4 vs. 5.9 ± 4.2) and improved implantation rates (20% vs. 12%) were also noted, but these did not reach statistical significance.
CONCLUSION: E2+antag pretreatment does not appear to improve IVF outcomes in ML protocol when compared to the standard OCP in poor responders. Randomized trials with adequate power to study the optimal method of steroid pretreatments appear justified.