Cargando…

Effective treatment protocol for poor ovarian response: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Poor ovarian response represents an increasingly common problem. This systematic review was aimed to identify the most effective treatment protocol for poor response. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library from 1980 to October 2015. Study quality assessment and meta-analyses were perf...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Jeve, Yadava Bapurao, Bhandari, Harish Malappa
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4915289/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27382230
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0974-1208.183515
_version_ 1782438679702142976
author Jeve, Yadava Bapurao
Bhandari, Harish Malappa
author_facet Jeve, Yadava Bapurao
Bhandari, Harish Malappa
author_sort Jeve, Yadava Bapurao
collection PubMed
description Poor ovarian response represents an increasingly common problem. This systematic review was aimed to identify the most effective treatment protocol for poor response. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library from 1980 to October 2015. Study quality assessment and meta-analyses were performed according to the Cochrane recommendations. We found 61 trials including 4997 cycles employing 10 management strategies. Most common strategy was the use of gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist (GnRHant), and was compared with GnRH agonist protocol (17 trials; n = 1696) for pituitary down-regulation which showed no significant difference in the outcome. Luteinizing hormone supplementation (eight trials, n = 847) showed no difference in the outcome. Growth hormone supplementation (seven trials; n = 251) showed significant improvement in clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) and live birth rate (LBR) with an odds ratio (OR) of 2.13 (95% CI 1.06–4.28) and 2.96 (95% CI 1.17–7.52). Testosterone supplementation (three trials; n = 225) significantly improved CPR (OR 2.4; 95% CI 1.16–5.04) and LBR (OR 2.18; 95% CI 1.01–4.68). Aromatase inhibitors (four trials; n = 223) and dehydroepiandrosterone supplementation (two trials; n = 57) had no effect on outcome.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4915289
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49152892016-07-05 Effective treatment protocol for poor ovarian response: A systematic review and meta-analysis Jeve, Yadava Bapurao Bhandari, Harish Malappa J Hum Reprod Sci Review Article Poor ovarian response represents an increasingly common problem. This systematic review was aimed to identify the most effective treatment protocol for poor response. We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and The Cochrane Library from 1980 to October 2015. Study quality assessment and meta-analyses were performed according to the Cochrane recommendations. We found 61 trials including 4997 cycles employing 10 management strategies. Most common strategy was the use of gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist (GnRHant), and was compared with GnRH agonist protocol (17 trials; n = 1696) for pituitary down-regulation which showed no significant difference in the outcome. Luteinizing hormone supplementation (eight trials, n = 847) showed no difference in the outcome. Growth hormone supplementation (seven trials; n = 251) showed significant improvement in clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) and live birth rate (LBR) with an odds ratio (OR) of 2.13 (95% CI 1.06–4.28) and 2.96 (95% CI 1.17–7.52). Testosterone supplementation (three trials; n = 225) significantly improved CPR (OR 2.4; 95% CI 1.16–5.04) and LBR (OR 2.18; 95% CI 1.01–4.68). Aromatase inhibitors (four trials; n = 223) and dehydroepiandrosterone supplementation (two trials; n = 57) had no effect on outcome. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2016 /pmc/articles/PMC4915289/ /pubmed/27382230 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0974-1208.183515 Text en Copyright: © Journal of Human Reproductive Sciences http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0 This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as the author is credited and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Review Article
Jeve, Yadava Bapurao
Bhandari, Harish Malappa
Effective treatment protocol for poor ovarian response: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title Effective treatment protocol for poor ovarian response: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full Effective treatment protocol for poor ovarian response: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_fullStr Effective treatment protocol for poor ovarian response: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_full_unstemmed Effective treatment protocol for poor ovarian response: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_short Effective treatment protocol for poor ovarian response: A systematic review and meta-analysis
title_sort effective treatment protocol for poor ovarian response: a systematic review and meta-analysis
topic Review Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4915289/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27382230
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/0974-1208.183515
work_keys_str_mv AT jeveyadavabapurao effectivetreatmentprotocolforpoorovarianresponseasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT bhandariharishmalappa effectivetreatmentprotocolforpoorovarianresponseasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis