Cargando…

Comparison of two ovarian stimulation protocols among women with poor response: A randomized clinical trial

This is a randomized controlled trial conducted in a tertiary referral fertility department. Participants were women with previous poor ovarian response undergoing in vitro fertilization. (IVF). One hundred and ninety-two women were randomized to the short GnRH agonist and antagonist regimens. The p...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Bavarsadkarimi, Minoodokht, Omidi, Sirous, Shahmoradi, Farinaz, Heidar, Zahra, Mirzaei, Sahar
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: PAGEPress Publications, Pavia, Italy 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9580530/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35796739
http://dx.doi.org/10.4081/ejtm.2022.10634
_version_ 1784812407633215488
author Bavarsadkarimi, Minoodokht
Omidi, Sirous
Shahmoradi, Farinaz
Heidar, Zahra
Mirzaei, Sahar
author_facet Bavarsadkarimi, Minoodokht
Omidi, Sirous
Shahmoradi, Farinaz
Heidar, Zahra
Mirzaei, Sahar
author_sort Bavarsadkarimi, Minoodokht
collection PubMed
description This is a randomized controlled trial conducted in a tertiary referral fertility department. Participants were women with previous poor ovarian response undergoing in vitro fertilization. (IVF). One hundred and ninety-two women were randomized to the short GnRH agonist and antagonist regimens. The primary outcome was the number of oocytes retrieved. Secondary outcome measures were the number of embryos transferred, chemical and clinical pregnancy rate and live birth. The number of oocytes retrieved was higher with the gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist regimen compared to the short agonist regimen (3.10 2.70 vs. 2.992.60), but there was no significant difference. The duration of stimulation and total gonadotropin dose were higher with short agonist regimens compared to antagonist regimens, with the latter being statistically significant (p < 0.001). The chemical pregnancy rate was 8.33 percent with the short agonist regimen and 7.29 percent with the antagonist regimen, with no statistically significant difference (p = 0.79). In terms of lower cycles cancelation and higher chemical pregnancy, short GnRH agonist regim is appropriate choice for poor responders.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9580530
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher PAGEPress Publications, Pavia, Italy
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-95805302022-10-20 Comparison of two ovarian stimulation protocols among women with poor response: A randomized clinical trial Bavarsadkarimi, Minoodokht Omidi, Sirous Shahmoradi, Farinaz Heidar, Zahra Mirzaei, Sahar Eur J Transl Myol Article This is a randomized controlled trial conducted in a tertiary referral fertility department. Participants were women with previous poor ovarian response undergoing in vitro fertilization. (IVF). One hundred and ninety-two women were randomized to the short GnRH agonist and antagonist regimens. The primary outcome was the number of oocytes retrieved. Secondary outcome measures were the number of embryos transferred, chemical and clinical pregnancy rate and live birth. The number of oocytes retrieved was higher with the gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist regimen compared to the short agonist regimen (3.10 2.70 vs. 2.992.60), but there was no significant difference. The duration of stimulation and total gonadotropin dose were higher with short agonist regimens compared to antagonist regimens, with the latter being statistically significant (p < 0.001). The chemical pregnancy rate was 8.33 percent with the short agonist regimen and 7.29 percent with the antagonist regimen, with no statistically significant difference (p = 0.79). In terms of lower cycles cancelation and higher chemical pregnancy, short GnRH agonist regim is appropriate choice for poor responders. PAGEPress Publications, Pavia, Italy 2022-07-06 /pmc/articles/PMC9580530/ /pubmed/35796739 http://dx.doi.org/10.4081/ejtm.2022.10634 Text en https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License (by-nc 4.0) which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
spellingShingle Article
Bavarsadkarimi, Minoodokht
Omidi, Sirous
Shahmoradi, Farinaz
Heidar, Zahra
Mirzaei, Sahar
Comparison of two ovarian stimulation protocols among women with poor response: A randomized clinical trial
title Comparison of two ovarian stimulation protocols among women with poor response: A randomized clinical trial
title_full Comparison of two ovarian stimulation protocols among women with poor response: A randomized clinical trial
title_fullStr Comparison of two ovarian stimulation protocols among women with poor response: A randomized clinical trial
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of two ovarian stimulation protocols among women with poor response: A randomized clinical trial
title_short Comparison of two ovarian stimulation protocols among women with poor response: A randomized clinical trial
title_sort comparison of two ovarian stimulation protocols among women with poor response: a randomized clinical trial
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9580530/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35796739
http://dx.doi.org/10.4081/ejtm.2022.10634
work_keys_str_mv AT bavarsadkarimiminoodokht comparisonoftwoovarianstimulationprotocolsamongwomenwithpoorresponsearandomizedclinicaltrial
AT omidisirous comparisonoftwoovarianstimulationprotocolsamongwomenwithpoorresponsearandomizedclinicaltrial
AT shahmoradifarinaz comparisonoftwoovarianstimulationprotocolsamongwomenwithpoorresponsearandomizedclinicaltrial
AT heidarzahra comparisonoftwoovarianstimulationprotocolsamongwomenwithpoorresponsearandomizedclinicaltrial
AT mirzaeisahar comparisonoftwoovarianstimulationprotocolsamongwomenwithpoorresponsearandomizedclinicaltrial