Cargando…

Ovarian stimulation with human and recombinant gonadotropin – comparison of in vitro fertilization efficiency with use of time-lapse monitoring

BACKGROUND: Achieving pregnancy by in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment depends on many factors, including the ovaries’ capacity and the efficiency of ovarian stimulation. The aim of this study was to assess the influence of ovarian stimulation with human and recombinant gonadotropin, as well as s...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Wdowiak, Artur, Bojar, Iwona
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2015
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4678530/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26667662
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12978-015-0106-8
_version_ 1782405458990989312
author Wdowiak, Artur
Bojar, Iwona
author_facet Wdowiak, Artur
Bojar, Iwona
author_sort Wdowiak, Artur
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Achieving pregnancy by in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment depends on many factors, including the ovaries’ capacity and the efficiency of ovarian stimulation. The aim of this study was to assess the influence of ovarian stimulation with human and recombinant gonadotropin, as well as specific hormonal parameters, on the effectiveness of IVF and the dynamics of embryonic development. METHODS: The study involved 221 women aged 25–35 years in whom intracytoplasmic sperm injection was performed. The ovarian stimulation was carried out according to the short protocol: injections of gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogue were followed by human (hFSH) and recombinant (rFSH) follicle-stimulating hormone administration. The growth of embryos was monitored with a time-lapse system. Levels of follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), luteinizing hormone (LH), and anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) were measured before ovarian stimulation, and levels of estradiol were assessed on the day of administration of recombinant chorionic gonadotropin. RESULTS: Pregnancy was achieved in 77 women (group A) – 42 (54.55 %) of them were stimulated with hFSH and 35 (45.45 %) were stimulated with rFSH. Among the 144 women in whom pregnancy was not achieved (group B), hFSH was administered to 73 (50.69 %) women and rFSH to 71 (49.31 %) women. In both groups subsequent embryo development stages were usually noted earlier after hFSH stimulation than after rFSH stimulation. The average values of AMH, estradiol, and estradiol per >17 mm follicle were higher in group A; in turn, FSH and LH mean levels were higher in group B. ROC curve analysis showed no statistically significant differences between accuracy of using FSH and AMH levels to predict pregnancy after IVF. CONCLUSIONS: The kind of gonadotropin applied to stimulate ovaries impacts the dynamics of embryo development - in women stimulated with hFSH, subsequent development stages were usually observed earlier than in women treated with rFSH; however, there was no statistically significant difference in pregnancy rates between women who were hFSH stimulated and those who were rFSH stimulated. The mean estradiol level was higher in women who achieved pregnancy than in women in whom pregnancy was not achieved AMH and FSH have the greater impact on achieving pregnancy than other hormones, and the value of AMH and FSH in predicting pregnancy is similar.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4678530
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2015
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-46785302015-12-16 Ovarian stimulation with human and recombinant gonadotropin – comparison of in vitro fertilization efficiency with use of time-lapse monitoring Wdowiak, Artur Bojar, Iwona Reprod Health Research BACKGROUND: Achieving pregnancy by in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment depends on many factors, including the ovaries’ capacity and the efficiency of ovarian stimulation. The aim of this study was to assess the influence of ovarian stimulation with human and recombinant gonadotropin, as well as specific hormonal parameters, on the effectiveness of IVF and the dynamics of embryonic development. METHODS: The study involved 221 women aged 25–35 years in whom intracytoplasmic sperm injection was performed. The ovarian stimulation was carried out according to the short protocol: injections of gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogue were followed by human (hFSH) and recombinant (rFSH) follicle-stimulating hormone administration. The growth of embryos was monitored with a time-lapse system. Levels of follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), luteinizing hormone (LH), and anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) were measured before ovarian stimulation, and levels of estradiol were assessed on the day of administration of recombinant chorionic gonadotropin. RESULTS: Pregnancy was achieved in 77 women (group A) – 42 (54.55 %) of them were stimulated with hFSH and 35 (45.45 %) were stimulated with rFSH. Among the 144 women in whom pregnancy was not achieved (group B), hFSH was administered to 73 (50.69 %) women and rFSH to 71 (49.31 %) women. In both groups subsequent embryo development stages were usually noted earlier after hFSH stimulation than after rFSH stimulation. The average values of AMH, estradiol, and estradiol per >17 mm follicle were higher in group A; in turn, FSH and LH mean levels were higher in group B. ROC curve analysis showed no statistically significant differences between accuracy of using FSH and AMH levels to predict pregnancy after IVF. CONCLUSIONS: The kind of gonadotropin applied to stimulate ovaries impacts the dynamics of embryo development - in women stimulated with hFSH, subsequent development stages were usually observed earlier than in women treated with rFSH; however, there was no statistically significant difference in pregnancy rates between women who were hFSH stimulated and those who were rFSH stimulated. The mean estradiol level was higher in women who achieved pregnancy than in women in whom pregnancy was not achieved AMH and FSH have the greater impact on achieving pregnancy than other hormones, and the value of AMH and FSH in predicting pregnancy is similar. BioMed Central 2015-12-15 /pmc/articles/PMC4678530/ /pubmed/26667662 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12978-015-0106-8 Text en © Wdowiak and Bojar. 2015 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated.
spellingShingle Research
Wdowiak, Artur
Bojar, Iwona
Ovarian stimulation with human and recombinant gonadotropin – comparison of in vitro fertilization efficiency with use of time-lapse monitoring
title Ovarian stimulation with human and recombinant gonadotropin – comparison of in vitro fertilization efficiency with use of time-lapse monitoring
title_full Ovarian stimulation with human and recombinant gonadotropin – comparison of in vitro fertilization efficiency with use of time-lapse monitoring
title_fullStr Ovarian stimulation with human and recombinant gonadotropin – comparison of in vitro fertilization efficiency with use of time-lapse monitoring
title_full_unstemmed Ovarian stimulation with human and recombinant gonadotropin – comparison of in vitro fertilization efficiency with use of time-lapse monitoring
title_short Ovarian stimulation with human and recombinant gonadotropin – comparison of in vitro fertilization efficiency with use of time-lapse monitoring
title_sort ovarian stimulation with human and recombinant gonadotropin – comparison of in vitro fertilization efficiency with use of time-lapse monitoring
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4678530/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26667662
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12978-015-0106-8
work_keys_str_mv AT wdowiakartur ovarianstimulationwithhumanandrecombinantgonadotropincomparisonofinvitrofertilizationefficiencywithuseoftimelapsemonitoring
AT bojariwona ovarianstimulationwithhumanandrecombinantgonadotropincomparisonofinvitrofertilizationefficiencywithuseoftimelapsemonitoring