Live birth rate with double ovarian stimulation is superior to follicular phase ovarian stimulation per started cycle in poor ovarian responders

被引:2
作者
Oral, Serkan [1 ]
Karacan, Meric [2 ]
Akpak, Yasam K. [3 ]
Sismanoglu, Alper [4 ]
Usta, Ceyda Sancakli [5 ]
机构
[1] Halic Univ, Dept Obstet & Gynaecol, Istanbul, Turkey
[2] Yeni Yuzyil Univ, Dept Obstet & Gynaecol, Istanbul, Turkey
[3] Univ Hlth Sci, Tepecik Training & Res Hosp, Dept Obstet & Gynaecol, 1140-1 Sokak St,1 Yenisehi, Izmir, Turkey
[4] Altinbas Univ, Dept Obstet & Gynaecol, Istanbul, Turkey
[5] Balikesir Univ, Dept Obstet & Gynaecol, Balikesir, Turkey
关键词
cryopreservation; double ovarian stimulation; frozen embryo transfer; in vitro fertilization; poor ovarian response; IN-VITRO FERTILIZATION; LUTEAL-PHASE; MENSTRUAL-CYCLE; FERTILITY PRESERVATION; EMBRYO-TRANSFER; WOMEN; DYNAMICS; DUOSTIM; MATURATION; FRESH;
D O I
10.1111/jog.14871
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
Aim To compare the outcome of double ovarian stimulation (DOS) with follicular phase ovarian stimulation (FPS) per started cycle in poor ovarian responders (PORs). Methods A total of 204 PORs who underwent ovulation induction for in vitro fertilization, cryopreservation of all embryos available, and frozen embryo transfer cycle were retrospectively analyzed. Of those, 146 received single FPS, and 58 received DOS. All viable embryos were cryopreserved and subsequently transferred within 1-6 months. Results The number of oocytes collected and the number of mature oocytes per started cycle were higher in the DOS group compared to the FPS group (6.0 +/- 1.9 vs. 2.8 +/- 1.3 and 4.3 +/- 1.3 vs. 2.2 +/- 1.2, respectively, p = 0.001). Clinical pregnancy rate and live birth rate per started cycle were also significantly higher in the DOS group than the FPS group (41.4% vs. 16.4% and 36.2% vs. 15.1%, respectively, p < 0.001). The cancellation rate of embryo transfer due to no viable embryo was significantly lower in the DOS group (10.3%) than the FPS group (40.4%) (p = 0.001). In the DOS group, numbers of oocytes (3.2 +/- 1.2 vs. 2.7 +/- 1.1, p = 0.006), MII oocytes (2.6 +/- 1.0 vs. 2.1 +/- 0.8, p = 0.001), and cryopreserved blastocysts (1.5 +/- 0.8 vs. 1.1 +/- 0.7, p = 0.002) were significantly higher in the luteal ovarian stimulation compared to follicular ovarian stimulation. Conclusions Live birth per started cycle with DOS is superior to FPS in PORs. Luteal phase stimulation contributes to improving pregnancy rates in these patients.
引用
收藏
页码:2705 / 2712
页数:8
相关论文
共 36 条
[1]   Progress in understanding ovarian follicular dynamics in cattle [J].
Adams, G. P. ;
Jaiswal, R. ;
Singh, J. ;
Malhi, P. .
THERIOGENOLOGY, 2008, 69 (01) :72-80
[2]   Dual stimulation using corifollitropin alfa in 54 Bologna criteria poor ovarian responders - a case series [J].
Alsbjerg, Birgit ;
Haahr, Thor ;
Elbaek, Helle O. ;
Laursen, Rita ;
Povlsen, Betina B. ;
Humaidan, Peter .
REPRODUCTIVE BIOMEDICINE ONLINE, 2019, 38 (05) :677-682
[3]   A new more detailed stratification of low responders to ovarian stimulation: from a poor ovarian response to a low prognosis concept [J].
Alviggi, Carlo ;
Andersen, Claus Y. ;
Buehler, Klaus ;
Conforti, Alessandro ;
De Placido, Giuseppe ;
Esteves, Sandro C. ;
Fischer, Robert ;
Galliano, Daniela ;
Polyzos, Nikolaos P. ;
Sunkara, Sesh K. ;
Ubaldi, Filippo M. ;
Humaidan, Peter .
FERTILITY AND STERILITY, 2016, 105 (06) :1452-1453
[4]   Ovarian antral folliculogenesis during the human menstrual cycle: a review [J].
Baerwald, Angela R. ;
Adams, Gregg P. ;
Pierson, Roger A. .
HUMAN REPRODUCTION UPDATE, 2012, 18 (01) :73-91
[5]  
BARBARINOMONNIER P, 1991, FERTIL STERIL, V56, P928
[6]   Ovarian stimulation during the luteal phase for fertility preservation of cancer patients: case reports and review of the literature [J].
Bedoschi, Giuliano M. ;
de Albuquerque, Felipe Oliveira ;
Ferriani, Rui Alberto ;
Navarro, Paula Andrea .
JOURNAL OF ASSISTED REPRODUCTION AND GENETICS, 2010, 27 (08) :491-494
[7]   Evaluation of Antral Follicle Growth in the Macaque Ovary during the Menstrual Cycle and Controlled Ovarian Stimulation by High-Resolution Ultrasonography [J].
Bishop, Cecily V. ;
Sparman, Michelle L. ;
Stanley, Jessica E. ;
Bahar, Alistair ;
Zelinski, Mary B. ;
Stouffer, Richard L. .
AMERICAN JOURNAL OF PRIMATOLOGY, 2009, 71 (05) :384-392
[8]   The Ovarian Response After Follicular Versus Luteal Phase Stimulation with a Double Stimulation Strategy [J].
Bourdon, Mathilde ;
Santulli, Pietro ;
Maignien, Chloe ;
Pocate-Cheriet, Khaled ;
Marcellin, Louis ;
Chen, Yulian ;
Chapron, Charles .
REPRODUCTIVE SCIENCES, 2020, 27 (01) :204-210
[9]   Random-start ovarian stimulation in patients with cancer [J].
Cakmak, Hakan ;
Rosen, Mitchell P. .
CURRENT OPINION IN OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY, 2015, 27 (03) :215-221
[10]   Ovarian response after random-start controlled ovarian stimulation to cryopreserve oocytes in cancer patients [J].
Campos, Ana Paula C. B. ;
Geber, Guilherme P. ;
Hurtado, Rodrigo ;
Sampaio, Marcos ;
Geber, Selmo .
JORNAL BRASILEIRO DE REPRODUCAO ASSISTIDA, 2018, 22 (04) :352-354