Cargando…

Evaluation of follicular flushing with double lumen needle in patients undergoing assisted reproductive technology treatments

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the possible impact of follicular flushing on the number of oocytes retrieved and oocytes in metaphase II in patients with poor ovarian response (POR) compared to direct aspiration. METHODS: This prospective, comparative, randomized single cent...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: de Souza, Marcelo Marinho, Mancebo, Ana Cristina Allemand, de Souza, Maria do Carmo Borges, Antunes, Roberto de Azevedo, Barbeitas, Ana Luiza, Raupp, Verônica de Almeida, da Silva, Layna Almeida Barbosa, Siqueira, Flávia, de Souza, Ana Luisa Bruno Marinho
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Brazilian Society of Assisted Reproduction 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8083866/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33904666
http://dx.doi.org/10.5935/1518-0557.20210009
_version_ 1783686041887047680
author de Souza, Marcelo Marinho
Mancebo, Ana Cristina Allemand
de Souza, Maria do Carmo Borges
Antunes, Roberto de Azevedo
Barbeitas, Ana Luiza
Raupp, Verônica de Almeida
da Silva, Layna Almeida Barbosa
Siqueira, Flávia
de Souza, Ana Luisa Bruno Marinho
author_facet de Souza, Marcelo Marinho
Mancebo, Ana Cristina Allemand
de Souza, Maria do Carmo Borges
Antunes, Roberto de Azevedo
Barbeitas, Ana Luiza
Raupp, Verônica de Almeida
da Silva, Layna Almeida Barbosa
Siqueira, Flávia
de Souza, Ana Luisa Bruno Marinho
author_sort de Souza, Marcelo Marinho
collection PubMed
description OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the possible impact of follicular flushing on the number of oocytes retrieved and oocytes in metaphase II in patients with poor ovarian response (POR) compared to direct aspiration. METHODS: This prospective, comparative, randomized single center study included 208 punctures of patients with POR, submitted to assisted reproduction technology (ART) treatments. Two groups were compared; one in which double lumen needles were used (Wallace DNS1733) for follicular flushing (n=105), and one in which single lumen needles were used (Wallace ONS1733) for direct aspiration (n=103), upon the observation of ≤ 5 follicles between 15-17 mm, ≤ 4 follicles with sizes greater than 18 mm on hCG day, and ≤ 7 recovered oocytes. RESULTS: There were no differences in age (39.07±3.88 vs. 38.11±3.43); weight (61.73±17.53 vs. 65.96±15.44); AMH (0.63±0.59 vs. 0.94±0.97); stimulation days (9.57±1.87 vs. 10.29±2.82); estradiol levels (788.94±670.82 vs. 940.16±694.69); progesterone (617.29±319.76 vs. 561.18±486.78); or number of follicles with sizes ≥18 mm (1.84±0.95 vs. 2.07±1.09). Although gonadotropin totals (1678.28±798.52 vs. 2080.45±852.36; p=0.0008), number of aspirated oocytes (3.00±2.11 vs. 3.69±2.20; p=0.02), and number of metaphase II oocytes (2.20±1.64 vs. 2.99±1.88; p=0.02) were significantly different, oocyte / follicle ratio ≥15 mm (0.93 vs. 0.98) and metaphase II oocytes / follicles ≥15 mm (0.68 vs. 0.79) were similar in both groups. The failure to capture was 16% vs. 9.8%. CONCLUSIONS: Considering that there was no difference in the oocyte per follicle ratio, follicular flushing did not increase the number of oocytes recovered from poor responders.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8083866
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Brazilian Society of Assisted Reproduction
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-80838662021-05-05 Evaluation of follicular flushing with double lumen needle in patients undergoing assisted reproductive technology treatments de Souza, Marcelo Marinho Mancebo, Ana Cristina Allemand de Souza, Maria do Carmo Borges Antunes, Roberto de Azevedo Barbeitas, Ana Luiza Raupp, Verônica de Almeida da Silva, Layna Almeida Barbosa Siqueira, Flávia de Souza, Ana Luisa Bruno Marinho JBRA Assist Reprod Original Article OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the possible impact of follicular flushing on the number of oocytes retrieved and oocytes in metaphase II in patients with poor ovarian response (POR) compared to direct aspiration. METHODS: This prospective, comparative, randomized single center study included 208 punctures of patients with POR, submitted to assisted reproduction technology (ART) treatments. Two groups were compared; one in which double lumen needles were used (Wallace DNS1733) for follicular flushing (n=105), and one in which single lumen needles were used (Wallace ONS1733) for direct aspiration (n=103), upon the observation of ≤ 5 follicles between 15-17 mm, ≤ 4 follicles with sizes greater than 18 mm on hCG day, and ≤ 7 recovered oocytes. RESULTS: There were no differences in age (39.07±3.88 vs. 38.11±3.43); weight (61.73±17.53 vs. 65.96±15.44); AMH (0.63±0.59 vs. 0.94±0.97); stimulation days (9.57±1.87 vs. 10.29±2.82); estradiol levels (788.94±670.82 vs. 940.16±694.69); progesterone (617.29±319.76 vs. 561.18±486.78); or number of follicles with sizes ≥18 mm (1.84±0.95 vs. 2.07±1.09). Although gonadotropin totals (1678.28±798.52 vs. 2080.45±852.36; p=0.0008), number of aspirated oocytes (3.00±2.11 vs. 3.69±2.20; p=0.02), and number of metaphase II oocytes (2.20±1.64 vs. 2.99±1.88; p=0.02) were significantly different, oocyte / follicle ratio ≥15 mm (0.93 vs. 0.98) and metaphase II oocytes / follicles ≥15 mm (0.68 vs. 0.79) were similar in both groups. The failure to capture was 16% vs. 9.8%. CONCLUSIONS: Considering that there was no difference in the oocyte per follicle ratio, follicular flushing did not increase the number of oocytes recovered from poor responders. Brazilian Society of Assisted Reproduction 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC8083866/ /pubmed/33904666 http://dx.doi.org/10.5935/1518-0557.20210009 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
de Souza, Marcelo Marinho
Mancebo, Ana Cristina Allemand
de Souza, Maria do Carmo Borges
Antunes, Roberto de Azevedo
Barbeitas, Ana Luiza
Raupp, Verônica de Almeida
da Silva, Layna Almeida Barbosa
Siqueira, Flávia
de Souza, Ana Luisa Bruno Marinho
Evaluation of follicular flushing with double lumen needle in patients undergoing assisted reproductive technology treatments
title Evaluation of follicular flushing with double lumen needle in patients undergoing assisted reproductive technology treatments
title_full Evaluation of follicular flushing with double lumen needle in patients undergoing assisted reproductive technology treatments
title_fullStr Evaluation of follicular flushing with double lumen needle in patients undergoing assisted reproductive technology treatments
title_full_unstemmed Evaluation of follicular flushing with double lumen needle in patients undergoing assisted reproductive technology treatments
title_short Evaluation of follicular flushing with double lumen needle in patients undergoing assisted reproductive technology treatments
title_sort evaluation of follicular flushing with double lumen needle in patients undergoing assisted reproductive technology treatments
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8083866/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33904666
http://dx.doi.org/10.5935/1518-0557.20210009
work_keys_str_mv AT desouzamarcelomarinho evaluationoffollicularflushingwithdoublelumenneedleinpatientsundergoingassistedreproductivetechnologytreatments
AT manceboanacristinaallemand evaluationoffollicularflushingwithdoublelumenneedleinpatientsundergoingassistedreproductivetechnologytreatments
AT desouzamariadocarmoborges evaluationoffollicularflushingwithdoublelumenneedleinpatientsundergoingassistedreproductivetechnologytreatments
AT antunesrobertodeazevedo evaluationoffollicularflushingwithdoublelumenneedleinpatientsundergoingassistedreproductivetechnologytreatments
AT barbeitasanaluiza evaluationoffollicularflushingwithdoublelumenneedleinpatientsundergoingassistedreproductivetechnologytreatments
AT rauppveronicadealmeida evaluationoffollicularflushingwithdoublelumenneedleinpatientsundergoingassistedreproductivetechnologytreatments
AT dasilvalaynaalmeidabarbosa evaluationoffollicularflushingwithdoublelumenneedleinpatientsundergoingassistedreproductivetechnologytreatments
AT siqueiraflavia evaluationoffollicularflushingwithdoublelumenneedleinpatientsundergoingassistedreproductivetechnologytreatments
AT desouzaanaluisabrunomarinho evaluationoffollicularflushingwithdoublelumenneedleinpatientsundergoingassistedreproductivetechnologytreatments