Objective:To determine whether a single dose of gonadotropin-releasing hormone(GnRH)agonist administered subcutaneously in addition to the regular progesterone supplementation could provide a better luteal support in ...Objective:To determine whether a single dose of gonadotropin-releasing hormone(GnRH)agonist administered subcutaneously in addition to the regular progesterone supplementation could provide a better luteal support in antagonist protocol fresh embryo transfer cycles.Methods:This prospective,multicentric,cohort study included total 140 women,70 in each group.Controlled ovarian stimulation was carried out as per fixed GnRH antagonist protocol.The trigger was given with hCG.In vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection(IVF/ICSI)was performed and day-3 embryos were transferred.Patients were divided into groups 1 and 2 based on computer generated randomization sheet.Six days following oocyte retrieval,group 1 received 0.2 mg decapeptyl subcutaneously in addition to regular progesterone support while group 2 received progesterone only.Luteal support was given for 14 days to both groups;if pregnancy was confirmed luteal support was continued till 12 weeks of gestation.The clinical pregnancy rate was the primary outcome.The implantation rate,miscarriage rate,live birth delivery rate,and multiple pregnancy rates were the secondary outcomes.Results:A total of 140 patients were analysed,70 in each group.Clinical pregnancy rates(47.1%vs.35.7%;P=0.17),implantation rates(23.4%vs.18.1%,P=0.24),live birth delivery rates(41.4%vs.27.1%,P=0.08),and multiple pregnancy rates(21.2%vs.16.0%,P=0.74)were higher in group 1 than in group 2.Group 1 had a lower miscarriage rate than group 2(5.7%vs.8.6%;P=0.75).However,these differences were not statistically significant between the two groups.Conclusions:Administration of a single dose of GnRH agonist in addition to regular natural micronized vaginal progesterone as luteal support in GnRH antagonist protocol cycles marginally improves implantation rates,clinical pregnancy rates,and live birth delivery rates.However,more studies with higher sample sizes are needed before any conclusive statements about GnRH agonist as luteal phase support can be made.展开更多
In order to compare GnRH agonist with antagonist protocol for the same patient during controlled ovarian stimulation cycles, the in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF-ET) outcome was retrospectively studie...In order to compare GnRH agonist with antagonist protocol for the same patient during controlled ovarian stimulation cycles, the in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF-ET) outcome was retrospectively studied in 81 patients undergoing 105 agonist protocols and 88 antagonist protocols. The results showed that there was no statistically significant difference in duration of ovarian stimulation, number of ampoules, oocytes retrieved, serum estradiol (E2) and progesterone (P) levels, thickness of endometrium, the zygote- and blastocyst-development rate between GnRH agonist and antagonist protocols (P〉0.05). High quality embryo rate was higher in antagonist protocols, but there was no significant difference between two protocols. Implantation rate and clinical pregnant rate were significantly higher in antagonist protocol (15.82% and 30.26%, respectively) than in agonist protocol (5.26% and 10.64% respectively (P〈0.05). It was concluded GnRH antagonist protocol probably improved the outcome of pregnancy of older patients with a history of multiple failure of IVF-ET in a GnRH protocol.展开更多
Objective To conduct a Meta-analysis of studies that compared the efficacies of mild ovarian stimulation and conventional long GnRH agonist protocol in patients under- going IVF or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (I...Objective To conduct a Meta-analysis of studies that compared the efficacies of mild ovarian stimulation and conventional long GnRH agonist protocol in patients under- going IVF or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). Methods Meta-analysis was performed. All studies were published by July 2012 with data related to outcomes following mild ovarian stimulation compared with the conventional protocol. Odds ratios (ORs) and weighted/standardized mean difference (WMD/SMD) from individual study were pooled in fixed and random effect models. Main outcome measure was the efficacy of mild ovarian stimulation. Results Six articles were included in this Meta-analysis. The number of oocytes retrieved was lower, the cycle cancellation rate was higher and the incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) was lower in the mild stimulation group than in conventional ovarian stimulation group. Clinical pregnancy rates were similar in both mild and conventional stimulation groups. Conclusions The level of evidence supporting the use of mild stimulation protocols in IVF is low, considering the fewer oocytes retrieved and the higher rates of cycle cancellation.展开更多
Objectives: The aim of the study was to compare the efficacy and safety of GnRH-agonist to the human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG) trigger in cases of simple ovarian stimulation.</span></span><span>&...Objectives: The aim of the study was to compare the efficacy and safety of GnRH-agonist to the human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG) trigger in cases of simple ovarian stimulation.</span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""> </span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">Study design: Randomized controlled trial was conducted on 291 women complaining of unexplained infertility visiting Elshatby Maternity University Hospital from February to December 2019. Trial registration unique ID</span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> is</span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> PACTR202001787868341 (</span></span></span><a href="https://www.pactr.org/"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">https://www.pactr.org/</span></span></span></a><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">). Age included from 20</span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""> </span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">- 43 years. All patients were stimulated by the sequential stimulation protocol using letrozole then FSH injection, when the criteria of ovulation trigger were reached</span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">;</span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> cases were randomized into two groups using closed envelopes method</span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">.</span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> Group A (123 cases) GnRh agonist (triptorelin 0.2 IU) subcutaneous injection and Group B (168 cases) HCG 10,000 IU intramuscular injection w</span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">ere</span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> used for triggering of ovulation then followed by timed intercourse.</span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""> </span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">Results: Primary outcome was the clinical pregnancy rate while rate of miscarriage and ovarian hyper-stimulation rate were the secondary outcome. Clinical pregnancy rates, in Group A w</span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">ere</span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> (21.1%) while it was (31.5%) in another group (P</span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""> </span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">=</span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""> </span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">0.049). Miscarriage rate was (4.9%) in the first group and (3.6%) in the second group (P</span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""> </span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">=</span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""> </span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">0.580). Except for one case of moderate ovarian hyper-stimulation syndrome (OHSS) complicated the HCG group, there were no such cases in GnRH group.</span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""> </span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">Conclusion: Triggering final oocyte maturation with HCG was superior to GnRH agonists triggers as regards the clinical pregnancy rate.展开更多
A GnRH agonist (5-50 μg) is capable of inducing ovulation in PMSG-primed hypophy-sectomized immature rats, as is the case in hCG-induced ovulation, but 2-4 h earlier than hCG. GnRH-induced ovulation is effectively bl...A GnRH agonist (5-50 μg) is capable of inducing ovulation in PMSG-primed hypophy-sectomized immature rats, as is the case in hCG-induced ovulation, but 2-4 h earlier than hCG. GnRH-induced ovulation is effectively blocked by the concomitant administration of the GnRH-antagonist which failed to interfere with hCG-induced ovulation, indicating that GnRH and its agonists do not share a receptor with LH/hCG. Like hCG, GnRH is also capable of inducing tissue type (tPA), but not urokinase type (uPA) PA. The plasminogen activator activity in ovarian homogenates and the granulosa and theca-interstitial cells increase in a time-dependent manner, reaching maximum levels just prior to ovulation. Similar to hCG, GnRH also increases tPA activity in cumulus-oocyte complexes in a time-dependent fashion.展开更多
In this study we demonstrate: (i) The GnRH agonist exerts a direct dose-dependet stimulative effect on the aromatase activity and progesterone production in cultured monkey granulosa cells; (ii)the stimulative effect ...In this study we demonstrate: (i) The GnRH agonist exerts a direct dose-dependet stimulative effect on the aromatase activity and progesterone production in cultured monkey granulosa cells; (ii)the stimulative effect on steroidogenesis can be completely blocked by concomitant treatment with a GnRH antagonist, suggesting that the actions of GnRH are mediated through stringent stereospecific recongnition sites; (iii) in addition to the stimulative effect, the GnRH agonist in the presence of gonadotropins also exerts an inhibitory effect, even though the peptide by itself is more effective in the stimulation of steroidogenesis, and the stimulation of gonadotropin on steroidogenesis could be gradually restored by decreasing the concentration of the GnRH agonist in the culture; and (iv) paradoxical effect can also be observed in the presence of cAMP-inducing agents, suggesting that the inhibitory action of the peptide on gonadotropin-induced steroidogenesis is localized at a step distal to the stringent recognition sites.展开更多
Background: This study aimed to determine if the gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol is optimal for expected poor ovarian responders with tubal factor undergoing in vitro fertilization-embryo tra...Background: This study aimed to determine if the gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol is optimal for expected poor ovarian responders with tubal factor undergoing in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer (IVF-ET). Methods: A total of 341 IVF-ET cycles were retrospectively identified. The following inclusion criteria were applied: age ≥ 40 years and patients with tubal factors. The cycles were divided into two groups: a GnRH antagonist group (157 cycles) and a GnRH agonist group (184 cycles). Results: The duration of stimulation and the total doses of gonadotropin in the GnRH agonist group were significantly more than those in the GnRH antagonist group (P < 0.05). There were significant differences in LH and P values on the hCG measurement days between the two groups (0.91 ± 1.17 vs. 4.82 ± 4.69 U/L and 0.69 ± 0.42 vs. 1.03 ± 0.50 ng/mL, P < 0.05). The implantation rate of the GnRH antagonist group was 12.24%, which was slightly higher than that of the GnRH agonist group (10.10%, P = 0.437). The clinical pregnancy rate of the two groups showed no statistical differences (23.36% vs. 23.03%, P = 1.000). Conclusion: For expected poor ovarian responders, the GnRH antagonist protocol was, to some extent, superior to the GnRH agonist protocol in terms of the implantation and clinical pregnancy rates.展开更多
Background: To assess the effect of these two protocols in patients of different ages. Methods: 1923 in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF-ET) cycles were divided into two groups: a GnRH-ant protocol group a...Background: To assess the effect of these two protocols in patients of different ages. Methods: 1923 in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF-ET) cycles were divided into two groups: a GnRH-ant protocol group and GnRH-a long protocol group, and then every group were subdivided into four age ranges. The general materials and IVF outcomes were compared. Results: The incidence of OHSS fluctuated from 0% to 2.37% with GnRH-ant protocol, which was significantly lower than another (P P Conclusion: The antagonist protocol should be considered in patients with a high ovarian response (e.g., PCOS patients) to avoid OHSS. Older patients (>35 years) could be treated with the antagonist protocol.展开更多
目的比较卵巢低反应(POR)患者行促性腺激素释放激素拮抗剂(GnRH-ant)及GnRH激动剂(GnRH-a)短方案的临床疗效。方法计算机检索PubMed、ProQuest Medical Library、Medline外文生物医学期刊文献数据库、中国生物医学文献数据库(CBM)、中...目的比较卵巢低反应(POR)患者行促性腺激素释放激素拮抗剂(GnRH-ant)及GnRH激动剂(GnRH-a)短方案的临床疗效。方法计算机检索PubMed、ProQuest Medical Library、Medline外文生物医学期刊文献数据库、中国生物医学文献数据库(CBM)、中国知网(CNKI)、中国科技期刊数据库(VIP)、万方数据库和读秀学术搜索引擎等。收集2000年至2014年10月发表的相关文献,比较POR患者行GnRH-ant及GnRH-a短方案的临床试验,按Cochrane系统评价方法提取有效数据,采用RevMan 5.2软件进行Meta分析。结果共纳入11篇文献,共855例(1 054个周期)POR患者,其中GnRHant组444例(549个周期),GnRH-a短方案组411例(505个周期);Meta分析结果显示:对于POR患者,两组间临床妊娠率[RR=1.25,95%CI(0.96,1.63),P=0.10]、促性腺激素(Gn)时间[WMD=-1.15,95%CI(-2.56,0.25),P=0.11]、Gn用量[WMD=63.54,95%CI(-59.08,186.17),P=0.31]、获卵数[WMD=0.16,95%CI(-0.66,0.98),P=0.70]、周期取消率[RR=1.07,95%CI(0.85,1.35),P=0.57]差异均无统计学意义,但临床妊娠率的结果偏向于拮抗剂组更优。结论对于POR患者,拮抗剂方案和GnRH-a短方案效果无统计学差异,但是拮抗剂组可能更有助于提高临床妊娠率,可以作为POR患者助孕的一个选择。展开更多
文摘Objective:To determine whether a single dose of gonadotropin-releasing hormone(GnRH)agonist administered subcutaneously in addition to the regular progesterone supplementation could provide a better luteal support in antagonist protocol fresh embryo transfer cycles.Methods:This prospective,multicentric,cohort study included total 140 women,70 in each group.Controlled ovarian stimulation was carried out as per fixed GnRH antagonist protocol.The trigger was given with hCG.In vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection(IVF/ICSI)was performed and day-3 embryos were transferred.Patients were divided into groups 1 and 2 based on computer generated randomization sheet.Six days following oocyte retrieval,group 1 received 0.2 mg decapeptyl subcutaneously in addition to regular progesterone support while group 2 received progesterone only.Luteal support was given for 14 days to both groups;if pregnancy was confirmed luteal support was continued till 12 weeks of gestation.The clinical pregnancy rate was the primary outcome.The implantation rate,miscarriage rate,live birth delivery rate,and multiple pregnancy rates were the secondary outcomes.Results:A total of 140 patients were analysed,70 in each group.Clinical pregnancy rates(47.1%vs.35.7%;P=0.17),implantation rates(23.4%vs.18.1%,P=0.24),live birth delivery rates(41.4%vs.27.1%,P=0.08),and multiple pregnancy rates(21.2%vs.16.0%,P=0.74)were higher in group 1 than in group 2.Group 1 had a lower miscarriage rate than group 2(5.7%vs.8.6%;P=0.75).However,these differences were not statistically significant between the two groups.Conclusions:Administration of a single dose of GnRH agonist in addition to regular natural micronized vaginal progesterone as luteal support in GnRH antagonist protocol cycles marginally improves implantation rates,clinical pregnancy rates,and live birth delivery rates.However,more studies with higher sample sizes are needed before any conclusive statements about GnRH agonist as luteal phase support can be made.
文摘In order to compare GnRH agonist with antagonist protocol for the same patient during controlled ovarian stimulation cycles, the in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF-ET) outcome was retrospectively studied in 81 patients undergoing 105 agonist protocols and 88 antagonist protocols. The results showed that there was no statistically significant difference in duration of ovarian stimulation, number of ampoules, oocytes retrieved, serum estradiol (E2) and progesterone (P) levels, thickness of endometrium, the zygote- and blastocyst-development rate between GnRH agonist and antagonist protocols (P〉0.05). High quality embryo rate was higher in antagonist protocols, but there was no significant difference between two protocols. Implantation rate and clinical pregnant rate were significantly higher in antagonist protocol (15.82% and 30.26%, respectively) than in agonist protocol (5.26% and 10.64% respectively (P〈0.05). It was concluded GnRH antagonist protocol probably improved the outcome of pregnancy of older patients with a history of multiple failure of IVF-ET in a GnRH protocol.
基金supported by grants from the Medical Research Council(No.XK02 200904)the Priority Academic Program Development of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions
文摘Objective To conduct a Meta-analysis of studies that compared the efficacies of mild ovarian stimulation and conventional long GnRH agonist protocol in patients under- going IVF or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). Methods Meta-analysis was performed. All studies were published by July 2012 with data related to outcomes following mild ovarian stimulation compared with the conventional protocol. Odds ratios (ORs) and weighted/standardized mean difference (WMD/SMD) from individual study were pooled in fixed and random effect models. Main outcome measure was the efficacy of mild ovarian stimulation. Results Six articles were included in this Meta-analysis. The number of oocytes retrieved was lower, the cycle cancellation rate was higher and the incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) was lower in the mild stimulation group than in conventional ovarian stimulation group. Clinical pregnancy rates were similar in both mild and conventional stimulation groups. Conclusions The level of evidence supporting the use of mild stimulation protocols in IVF is low, considering the fewer oocytes retrieved and the higher rates of cycle cancellation.
文摘Objectives: The aim of the study was to compare the efficacy and safety of GnRH-agonist to the human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG) trigger in cases of simple ovarian stimulation.</span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""> </span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">Study design: Randomized controlled trial was conducted on 291 women complaining of unexplained infertility visiting Elshatby Maternity University Hospital from February to December 2019. Trial registration unique ID</span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> is</span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> PACTR202001787868341 (</span></span></span><a href="https://www.pactr.org/"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">https://www.pactr.org/</span></span></span></a><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">). Age included from 20</span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""> </span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">- 43 years. All patients were stimulated by the sequential stimulation protocol using letrozole then FSH injection, when the criteria of ovulation trigger were reached</span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">;</span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> cases were randomized into two groups using closed envelopes method</span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">.</span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> Group A (123 cases) GnRh agonist (triptorelin 0.2 IU) subcutaneous injection and Group B (168 cases) HCG 10,000 IU intramuscular injection w</span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">ere</span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> used for triggering of ovulation then followed by timed intercourse.</span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""> </span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">Results: Primary outcome was the clinical pregnancy rate while rate of miscarriage and ovarian hyper-stimulation rate were the secondary outcome. Clinical pregnancy rates, in Group A w</span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">ere</span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"> (21.1%) while it was (31.5%) in another group (P</span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""> </span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">=</span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""> </span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">0.049). Miscarriage rate was (4.9%) in the first group and (3.6%) in the second group (P</span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""> </span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">=</span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""> </span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">0.580). Except for one case of moderate ovarian hyper-stimulation syndrome (OHSS) complicated the HCG group, there were no such cases in GnRH group.</span></span></span><span><span><span style="font-family:""> </span></span></span><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;"><span style="font-family:Verdana;">Conclusion: Triggering final oocyte maturation with HCG was superior to GnRH agonists triggers as regards the clinical pregnancy rate.
基金Project supported by NIH Research Grant(HD-14084), Rockefeller Foundation, New York and the National Natural Science Foundation of China.
文摘A GnRH agonist (5-50 μg) is capable of inducing ovulation in PMSG-primed hypophy-sectomized immature rats, as is the case in hCG-induced ovulation, but 2-4 h earlier than hCG. GnRH-induced ovulation is effectively blocked by the concomitant administration of the GnRH-antagonist which failed to interfere with hCG-induced ovulation, indicating that GnRH and its agonists do not share a receptor with LH/hCG. Like hCG, GnRH is also capable of inducing tissue type (tPA), but not urokinase type (uPA) PA. The plasminogen activator activity in ovarian homogenates and the granulosa and theca-interstitial cells increase in a time-dependent manner, reaching maximum levels just prior to ovulation. Similar to hCG, GnRH also increases tPA activity in cumulus-oocyte complexes in a time-dependent fashion.
基金This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China and Rockefeller Foundation, New York.
文摘In this study we demonstrate: (i) The GnRH agonist exerts a direct dose-dependet stimulative effect on the aromatase activity and progesterone production in cultured monkey granulosa cells; (ii)the stimulative effect on steroidogenesis can be completely blocked by concomitant treatment with a GnRH antagonist, suggesting that the actions of GnRH are mediated through stringent stereospecific recongnition sites; (iii) in addition to the stimulative effect, the GnRH agonist in the presence of gonadotropins also exerts an inhibitory effect, even though the peptide by itself is more effective in the stimulation of steroidogenesis, and the stimulation of gonadotropin on steroidogenesis could be gradually restored by decreasing the concentration of the GnRH agonist in the culture; and (iv) paradoxical effect can also be observed in the presence of cAMP-inducing agents, suggesting that the inhibitory action of the peptide on gonadotropin-induced steroidogenesis is localized at a step distal to the stringent recognition sites.
文摘Background: This study aimed to determine if the gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol is optimal for expected poor ovarian responders with tubal factor undergoing in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer (IVF-ET). Methods: A total of 341 IVF-ET cycles were retrospectively identified. The following inclusion criteria were applied: age ≥ 40 years and patients with tubal factors. The cycles were divided into two groups: a GnRH antagonist group (157 cycles) and a GnRH agonist group (184 cycles). Results: The duration of stimulation and the total doses of gonadotropin in the GnRH agonist group were significantly more than those in the GnRH antagonist group (P < 0.05). There were significant differences in LH and P values on the hCG measurement days between the two groups (0.91 ± 1.17 vs. 4.82 ± 4.69 U/L and 0.69 ± 0.42 vs. 1.03 ± 0.50 ng/mL, P < 0.05). The implantation rate of the GnRH antagonist group was 12.24%, which was slightly higher than that of the GnRH agonist group (10.10%, P = 0.437). The clinical pregnancy rate of the two groups showed no statistical differences (23.36% vs. 23.03%, P = 1.000). Conclusion: For expected poor ovarian responders, the GnRH antagonist protocol was, to some extent, superior to the GnRH agonist protocol in terms of the implantation and clinical pregnancy rates.
文摘Background: To assess the effect of these two protocols in patients of different ages. Methods: 1923 in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF-ET) cycles were divided into two groups: a GnRH-ant protocol group and GnRH-a long protocol group, and then every group were subdivided into four age ranges. The general materials and IVF outcomes were compared. Results: The incidence of OHSS fluctuated from 0% to 2.37% with GnRH-ant protocol, which was significantly lower than another (P P Conclusion: The antagonist protocol should be considered in patients with a high ovarian response (e.g., PCOS patients) to avoid OHSS. Older patients (>35 years) could be treated with the antagonist protocol.
文摘目的比较卵巢低反应(POR)患者行促性腺激素释放激素拮抗剂(GnRH-ant)及GnRH激动剂(GnRH-a)短方案的临床疗效。方法计算机检索PubMed、ProQuest Medical Library、Medline外文生物医学期刊文献数据库、中国生物医学文献数据库(CBM)、中国知网(CNKI)、中国科技期刊数据库(VIP)、万方数据库和读秀学术搜索引擎等。收集2000年至2014年10月发表的相关文献,比较POR患者行GnRH-ant及GnRH-a短方案的临床试验,按Cochrane系统评价方法提取有效数据,采用RevMan 5.2软件进行Meta分析。结果共纳入11篇文献,共855例(1 054个周期)POR患者,其中GnRHant组444例(549个周期),GnRH-a短方案组411例(505个周期);Meta分析结果显示:对于POR患者,两组间临床妊娠率[RR=1.25,95%CI(0.96,1.63),P=0.10]、促性腺激素(Gn)时间[WMD=-1.15,95%CI(-2.56,0.25),P=0.11]、Gn用量[WMD=63.54,95%CI(-59.08,186.17),P=0.31]、获卵数[WMD=0.16,95%CI(-0.66,0.98),P=0.70]、周期取消率[RR=1.07,95%CI(0.85,1.35),P=0.57]差异均无统计学意义,但临床妊娠率的结果偏向于拮抗剂组更优。结论对于POR患者,拮抗剂方案和GnRH-a短方案效果无统计学差异,但是拮抗剂组可能更有助于提高临床妊娠率,可以作为POR患者助孕的一个选择。