European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology · 2025
Cumulative success rates analysis of luteal phase ovarian stimulation protocols in IVF-ET: A retrospective cohort study across different age groups and AMH levels.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Wang Linlin, Guo Wei, Tian Tian, Chen Lixue, Wu Hongping, Yang Shuo, Zhen Xiumei, Wang Ying, Li Rong, Qiao Jie, Yang Rui
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to compare luteal phase ovarian stimulation (LPS) with traditional follicular phase stimulation (FPS) protocols of in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer (IVF-ET). The primary objective is to assess the cumulative success rates of LPS in women.
METHODS: A retrospective matched case-control study was conducted, encompassing 114 LPS cycles and 110 control cycles utilizing the gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol. Both groups were matched based on age and anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) levels. The primary outcome measures included cumulative clinical pregnancy rates (CCPRs) and cumulative live birth rates (CLBRs) following one to three transfer cycles post-oocyte retrieval.
RESULTS: CCPRs after the first, second, and third transfer cycles were 42.0%, 43.9%, and 44.8% in the LPS group, compared to 28.4%, 38.0%, and 40.0% in the control group. Similarly, the CLBRs were 32.0%, 33.3%, and 32.8% in the LPS group, versus 17.9%, 27.0%, and 28.6% in the control group. Both the CCPRs and CLBRs were not significantly different. Both CCPRs and CLBRs showed trends favoring the LPS protocol, but these differences were not statistically significant. No significant differences were noted between the two groups regarding gestational age or birth weight outcomes. Furthermore, stratification by age within the LPS group revealed varying success rates; however, no statistically significant differences were identified across subgroups.
CONCLUSION: Although no statistically significant differences were observed, the LPS protocol demonstrated promising trends toward higher CCPRs and CLBRs. It may serve as a feasible, cost-effective, and convenient alternative for individuals with diminished ovarian reserve (DOR) and advanced age, particularly those with previous IVF failures.
METHODS: A retrospective matched case-control study was conducted, encompassing 114 LPS cycles and 110 control cycles utilizing the gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol. Both groups were matched based on age and anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) levels. The primary outcome measures included cumulative clinical pregnancy rates (CCPRs) and cumulative live birth rates (CLBRs) following one to three transfer cycles post-oocyte retrieval.
RESULTS: CCPRs after the first, second, and third transfer cycles were 42.0%, 43.9%, and 44.8% in the LPS group, compared to 28.4%, 38.0%, and 40.0% in the control group. Similarly, the CLBRs were 32.0%, 33.3%, and 32.8% in the LPS group, versus 17.9%, 27.0%, and 28.6% in the control group. Both the CCPRs and CLBRs were not significantly different. Both CCPRs and CLBRs showed trends favoring the LPS protocol, but these differences were not statistically significant. No significant differences were noted between the two groups regarding gestational age or birth weight outcomes. Furthermore, stratification by age within the LPS group revealed varying success rates; however, no statistically significant differences were identified across subgroups.
CONCLUSION: Although no statistically significant differences were observed, the LPS protocol demonstrated promising trends toward higher CCPRs and CLBRs. It may serve as a feasible, cost-effective, and convenient alternative for individuals with diminished ovarian reserve (DOR) and advanced age, particularly those with previous IVF failures.