Cargando…
Urinary Versus Recombinant Gonadotropins for Ovarian Stimulation in Women Undergoing Treatment with Assisted Reproductive Technology
Globally, about 10%–15% couples are affected by infertility, with major role being played by the couple's lifestyle. Several gonadotropin preparations (urinary, purified urinary, recombinant, and biosimilars) are available for use. Purified urinary formulations offer numerous advantages over th...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6094533/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30158806 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jhrs.JHRS_79_17 |
_version_ | 1783347836304228352 |
---|---|
author | Patki, Ameet Bavishi, Himanshu Kumari, Chandravati Kamraj, Jayarani Venugopal, M. Kunjimoideen, K. U. Nadkarni, Poornima Sankari, Samundi Chaudhary, Sunil Sangeeta, M. J. Manjunath, C. S. Kumar, Pratap |
author_facet | Patki, Ameet Bavishi, Himanshu Kumari, Chandravati Kamraj, Jayarani Venugopal, M. Kunjimoideen, K. U. Nadkarni, Poornima Sankari, Samundi Chaudhary, Sunil Sangeeta, M. J. Manjunath, C. S. Kumar, Pratap |
author_sort | Patki, Ameet |
collection | PubMed |
description | Globally, about 10%–15% couples are affected by infertility, with major role being played by the couple's lifestyle. Several gonadotropin preparations (urinary, purified urinary, recombinant, and biosimilars) are available for use. Purified urinary formulations offer numerous advantages over their predecessor, including lesser injection dose required, ability to be administered subcutaneously, less batch-to-batch variability, better efficacy, ability to individualize protocols as per patient's need, better control of developing follicles, less risk of multiple pregnancies, and hyperstimulation. Published results of Cochrane reviews and meta-analysis show no difference in efficacy or safety between urinary and recombinant gonadotropins. In the absence of any significant difference, cost plays an important role in deciding choice of gonadotropins. In this article, we have reviewed the results of comparative clinical trials, Cochrane analysis, and meta-analysis to derive consensus statements regarding efficacy, safety, and cost implications of urinary versus recombinant gonadotropin preparations. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6094533 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-60945332018-08-29 Urinary Versus Recombinant Gonadotropins for Ovarian Stimulation in Women Undergoing Treatment with Assisted Reproductive Technology Patki, Ameet Bavishi, Himanshu Kumari, Chandravati Kamraj, Jayarani Venugopal, M. Kunjimoideen, K. U. Nadkarni, Poornima Sankari, Samundi Chaudhary, Sunil Sangeeta, M. J. Manjunath, C. S. Kumar, Pratap J Hum Reprod Sci Review Article Globally, about 10%–15% couples are affected by infertility, with major role being played by the couple's lifestyle. Several gonadotropin preparations (urinary, purified urinary, recombinant, and biosimilars) are available for use. Purified urinary formulations offer numerous advantages over their predecessor, including lesser injection dose required, ability to be administered subcutaneously, less batch-to-batch variability, better efficacy, ability to individualize protocols as per patient's need, better control of developing follicles, less risk of multiple pregnancies, and hyperstimulation. Published results of Cochrane reviews and meta-analysis show no difference in efficacy or safety between urinary and recombinant gonadotropins. In the absence of any significant difference, cost plays an important role in deciding choice of gonadotropins. In this article, we have reviewed the results of comparative clinical trials, Cochrane analysis, and meta-analysis to derive consensus statements regarding efficacy, safety, and cost implications of urinary versus recombinant gonadotropin preparations. Medknow Publications & Media Pvt Ltd 2018 /pmc/articles/PMC6094533/ /pubmed/30158806 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jhrs.JHRS_79_17 Text en Copyright: © 2018 Journal of Human Reproductive Sciences http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms. |
spellingShingle | Review Article Patki, Ameet Bavishi, Himanshu Kumari, Chandravati Kamraj, Jayarani Venugopal, M. Kunjimoideen, K. U. Nadkarni, Poornima Sankari, Samundi Chaudhary, Sunil Sangeeta, M. J. Manjunath, C. S. Kumar, Pratap Urinary Versus Recombinant Gonadotropins for Ovarian Stimulation in Women Undergoing Treatment with Assisted Reproductive Technology |
title | Urinary Versus Recombinant Gonadotropins for Ovarian Stimulation in Women Undergoing Treatment with Assisted Reproductive Technology |
title_full | Urinary Versus Recombinant Gonadotropins for Ovarian Stimulation in Women Undergoing Treatment with Assisted Reproductive Technology |
title_fullStr | Urinary Versus Recombinant Gonadotropins for Ovarian Stimulation in Women Undergoing Treatment with Assisted Reproductive Technology |
title_full_unstemmed | Urinary Versus Recombinant Gonadotropins for Ovarian Stimulation in Women Undergoing Treatment with Assisted Reproductive Technology |
title_short | Urinary Versus Recombinant Gonadotropins for Ovarian Stimulation in Women Undergoing Treatment with Assisted Reproductive Technology |
title_sort | urinary versus recombinant gonadotropins for ovarian stimulation in women undergoing treatment with assisted reproductive technology |
topic | Review Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6094533/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30158806 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jhrs.JHRS_79_17 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT patkiameet urinaryversusrecombinantgonadotropinsforovarianstimulationinwomenundergoingtreatmentwithassistedreproductivetechnology AT bavishihimanshu urinaryversusrecombinantgonadotropinsforovarianstimulationinwomenundergoingtreatmentwithassistedreproductivetechnology AT kumarichandravati urinaryversusrecombinantgonadotropinsforovarianstimulationinwomenundergoingtreatmentwithassistedreproductivetechnology AT kamrajjayarani urinaryversusrecombinantgonadotropinsforovarianstimulationinwomenundergoingtreatmentwithassistedreproductivetechnology AT venugopalm urinaryversusrecombinantgonadotropinsforovarianstimulationinwomenundergoingtreatmentwithassistedreproductivetechnology AT kunjimoideenku urinaryversusrecombinantgonadotropinsforovarianstimulationinwomenundergoingtreatmentwithassistedreproductivetechnology AT nadkarnipoornima urinaryversusrecombinantgonadotropinsforovarianstimulationinwomenundergoingtreatmentwithassistedreproductivetechnology AT sankarisamundi urinaryversusrecombinantgonadotropinsforovarianstimulationinwomenundergoingtreatmentwithassistedreproductivetechnology AT chaudharysunil urinaryversusrecombinantgonadotropinsforovarianstimulationinwomenundergoingtreatmentwithassistedreproductivetechnology AT sangeetamj urinaryversusrecombinantgonadotropinsforovarianstimulationinwomenundergoingtreatmentwithassistedreproductivetechnology AT manjunathcs urinaryversusrecombinantgonadotropinsforovarianstimulationinwomenundergoingtreatmentwithassistedreproductivetechnology AT kumarpratap urinaryversusrecombinantgonadotropinsforovarianstimulationinwomenundergoingtreatmentwithassistedreproductivetechnology |