Cargando…

The ovulation trigger–OPU time interval of different ovarian protocols in ART: a retrospective study

PURPOSE: To explore the trends of oocyte and pregnancy outcomes over the ovulation trigger–OPU (oocyte pickup) time interval in four mainly used COH protocols. METHODS: This retrospective study was conducted between January 2013 and July 2018. The IVF/ICSI cycles of the patients with normal ovarian...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shen, Xi, Long, Hui, Guo, Wenya, Xie, Yating, Gao, Hongyuan, Zhang, Jie, Wang, Yun, Lyu, Qifeng, Kuang, Yanping, Wang, Li
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7321905/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32495015
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00404-020-05568-5
_version_ 1783551558786482176
author Shen, Xi
Long, Hui
Guo, Wenya
Xie, Yating
Gao, Hongyuan
Zhang, Jie
Wang, Yun
Lyu, Qifeng
Kuang, Yanping
Wang, Li
author_facet Shen, Xi
Long, Hui
Guo, Wenya
Xie, Yating
Gao, Hongyuan
Zhang, Jie
Wang, Yun
Lyu, Qifeng
Kuang, Yanping
Wang, Li
author_sort Shen, Xi
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: To explore the trends of oocyte and pregnancy outcomes over the ovulation trigger–OPU (oocyte pickup) time interval in four mainly used COH protocols. METHODS: This retrospective study was conducted between January 2013 and July 2018. The IVF/ICSI cycles of the patients with normal ovarian reserve were included. The number of total patients was 4673, which consisted of long agonist protocol (n = 819), short agonist protocol (n = 1703), mild stimulation protocol (n = 1627), and GnRH antagonist protocol (n = 524). The primary outcome was mature oocyte rate. RESULTS: The ovulation trigger–OPU time interval and COH protocol were related to cycles with > 80% MII oocytes. Four protocols showed apparently different trends of retrieved oocyte rate and mature oocyte rate over the ovulation trigger–OPU time interval, and the long agonist protocol had the most delayed time interval than other three COH protocols in retrieving more than 60% oocytes (35.4–39.6 h vs. 34.6–38.6 h vs. 32.5–37.5 h vs. 33.8–37.7 h) and getting more than 80% mature oocytes (35.0–39.7 h vs. 36.0–37.7 h vs. 34.1–35.5 h vs. 34.5–36.3 h). And the adjusted odds ratio (OR) of the cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) (OR 1.360, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.156–1.549, P < 0.05) significantly increased with the trigger–OPU time interval in the long agonist protocol. CONCLUSIONS: For getting more and mature oocytes, the ovulation trigger–OPU time intervals should be gradually prolonged from the mild stimulation protocol, the GnRH antagonist protocol, and the short protocol to the long agonist protocol. And the prolonged ovulation trigger–OPU time interval in the long agonist protocol brings higher live birth rate (LBR) and CLBR. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00404-020-05568-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7321905
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Springer Berlin Heidelberg
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-73219052020-07-02 The ovulation trigger–OPU time interval of different ovarian protocols in ART: a retrospective study Shen, Xi Long, Hui Guo, Wenya Xie, Yating Gao, Hongyuan Zhang, Jie Wang, Yun Lyu, Qifeng Kuang, Yanping Wang, Li Arch Gynecol Obstet Gynecologic Endocrinology and Reproductive Medicine PURPOSE: To explore the trends of oocyte and pregnancy outcomes over the ovulation trigger–OPU (oocyte pickup) time interval in four mainly used COH protocols. METHODS: This retrospective study was conducted between January 2013 and July 2018. The IVF/ICSI cycles of the patients with normal ovarian reserve were included. The number of total patients was 4673, which consisted of long agonist protocol (n = 819), short agonist protocol (n = 1703), mild stimulation protocol (n = 1627), and GnRH antagonist protocol (n = 524). The primary outcome was mature oocyte rate. RESULTS: The ovulation trigger–OPU time interval and COH protocol were related to cycles with > 80% MII oocytes. Four protocols showed apparently different trends of retrieved oocyte rate and mature oocyte rate over the ovulation trigger–OPU time interval, and the long agonist protocol had the most delayed time interval than other three COH protocols in retrieving more than 60% oocytes (35.4–39.6 h vs. 34.6–38.6 h vs. 32.5–37.5 h vs. 33.8–37.7 h) and getting more than 80% mature oocytes (35.0–39.7 h vs. 36.0–37.7 h vs. 34.1–35.5 h vs. 34.5–36.3 h). And the adjusted odds ratio (OR) of the cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) (OR 1.360, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.156–1.549, P < 0.05) significantly increased with the trigger–OPU time interval in the long agonist protocol. CONCLUSIONS: For getting more and mature oocytes, the ovulation trigger–OPU time intervals should be gradually prolonged from the mild stimulation protocol, the GnRH antagonist protocol, and the short protocol to the long agonist protocol. And the prolonged ovulation trigger–OPU time interval in the long agonist protocol brings higher live birth rate (LBR) and CLBR. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s00404-020-05568-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2020-06-03 2020 /pmc/articles/PMC7321905/ /pubmed/32495015 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00404-020-05568-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2020 Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
spellingShingle Gynecologic Endocrinology and Reproductive Medicine
Shen, Xi
Long, Hui
Guo, Wenya
Xie, Yating
Gao, Hongyuan
Zhang, Jie
Wang, Yun
Lyu, Qifeng
Kuang, Yanping
Wang, Li
The ovulation trigger–OPU time interval of different ovarian protocols in ART: a retrospective study
title The ovulation trigger–OPU time interval of different ovarian protocols in ART: a retrospective study
title_full The ovulation trigger–OPU time interval of different ovarian protocols in ART: a retrospective study
title_fullStr The ovulation trigger–OPU time interval of different ovarian protocols in ART: a retrospective study
title_full_unstemmed The ovulation trigger–OPU time interval of different ovarian protocols in ART: a retrospective study
title_short The ovulation trigger–OPU time interval of different ovarian protocols in ART: a retrospective study
title_sort ovulation trigger–opu time interval of different ovarian protocols in art: a retrospective study
topic Gynecologic Endocrinology and Reproductive Medicine
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7321905/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32495015
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00404-020-05568-5
work_keys_str_mv AT shenxi theovulationtriggeroputimeintervalofdifferentovarianprotocolsinartaretrospectivestudy
AT longhui theovulationtriggeroputimeintervalofdifferentovarianprotocolsinartaretrospectivestudy
AT guowenya theovulationtriggeroputimeintervalofdifferentovarianprotocolsinartaretrospectivestudy
AT xieyating theovulationtriggeroputimeintervalofdifferentovarianprotocolsinartaretrospectivestudy
AT gaohongyuan theovulationtriggeroputimeintervalofdifferentovarianprotocolsinartaretrospectivestudy
AT zhangjie theovulationtriggeroputimeintervalofdifferentovarianprotocolsinartaretrospectivestudy
AT wangyun theovulationtriggeroputimeintervalofdifferentovarianprotocolsinartaretrospectivestudy
AT lyuqifeng theovulationtriggeroputimeintervalofdifferentovarianprotocolsinartaretrospectivestudy
AT kuangyanping theovulationtriggeroputimeintervalofdifferentovarianprotocolsinartaretrospectivestudy
AT wangli theovulationtriggeroputimeintervalofdifferentovarianprotocolsinartaretrospectivestudy
AT shenxi ovulationtriggeroputimeintervalofdifferentovarianprotocolsinartaretrospectivestudy
AT longhui ovulationtriggeroputimeintervalofdifferentovarianprotocolsinartaretrospectivestudy
AT guowenya ovulationtriggeroputimeintervalofdifferentovarianprotocolsinartaretrospectivestudy
AT xieyating ovulationtriggeroputimeintervalofdifferentovarianprotocolsinartaretrospectivestudy
AT gaohongyuan ovulationtriggeroputimeintervalofdifferentovarianprotocolsinartaretrospectivestudy
AT zhangjie ovulationtriggeroputimeintervalofdifferentovarianprotocolsinartaretrospectivestudy
AT wangyun ovulationtriggeroputimeintervalofdifferentovarianprotocolsinartaretrospectivestudy
AT lyuqifeng ovulationtriggeroputimeintervalofdifferentovarianprotocolsinartaretrospectivestudy
AT kuangyanping ovulationtriggeroputimeintervalofdifferentovarianprotocolsinartaretrospectivestudy
AT wangli ovulationtriggeroputimeintervalofdifferentovarianprotocolsinartaretrospectivestudy