Long GnRH Agonist versus GnRH Antagonist Protocols in Women with Endometrioma and Good Ovarian Reserve Undergoing IVF/ICSI Cycles

Q4 Medicine
M. Eftekhar, N. Tabibnejad, Banafsheh Mohammadi
{"title":"Long GnRH Agonist versus GnRH Antagonist Protocols in Women with Endometrioma and Good Ovarian Reserve Undergoing IVF/ICSI Cycles","authors":"M. Eftekhar, N. Tabibnejad, Banafsheh Mohammadi","doi":"10.34172/jkmu.2023.07","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The best ovarian stimulation protocol in the case of endometrioma-related infertility is still debated. In this study, we examined the effect of two ovarian stimulation protocols on in vitro fertilization (IVF)/intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) outcome in patients with good ovarian reserve suffering from endometrioma. Methods: In a retrospective study, 101 women with endometrioma and good ovarian reserve were recruited. Women received either gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists (n=65) or GnRH antagonists (n=36) in an IVF or ICSI cycle. Clinical and chemical pregnancy rate, live birth rate, implantation rate, fertilization rate and fertilization proportion, as well as miscarriage rate, were evaluated in both groups. Results: Chemical (25% vs. 28.6%), clinical (19.6% vs. 25%), and live birth rates (19.6% vs. 25%) as well as implantation rate (11.7% vs. 15%) were not significantly different between the two groups. Miscarriage rate, fertilization rate and fertilization proportion were similar in the two groups. Conclusion: GnRH antagonist protocol with the main advantages of short duration and lower cost of treatment could be applied in infertile patients with endometrioma and good ovarian reserve.","PeriodicalId":39002,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Kerman University of Medical Sciences","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Kerman University of Medical Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.34172/jkmu.2023.07","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The best ovarian stimulation protocol in the case of endometrioma-related infertility is still debated. In this study, we examined the effect of two ovarian stimulation protocols on in vitro fertilization (IVF)/intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) outcome in patients with good ovarian reserve suffering from endometrioma. Methods: In a retrospective study, 101 women with endometrioma and good ovarian reserve were recruited. Women received either gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists (n=65) or GnRH antagonists (n=36) in an IVF or ICSI cycle. Clinical and chemical pregnancy rate, live birth rate, implantation rate, fertilization rate and fertilization proportion, as well as miscarriage rate, were evaluated in both groups. Results: Chemical (25% vs. 28.6%), clinical (19.6% vs. 25%), and live birth rates (19.6% vs. 25%) as well as implantation rate (11.7% vs. 15%) were not significantly different between the two groups. Miscarriage rate, fertilization rate and fertilization proportion were similar in the two groups. Conclusion: GnRH antagonist protocol with the main advantages of short duration and lower cost of treatment could be applied in infertile patients with endometrioma and good ovarian reserve.
长促性腺激素受体激动剂与促性腺激素受体拮抗剂在子宫内膜异位瘤和卵巢储备良好的妇女接受IVF/ICSI周期的方案
背景:子宫内膜异位瘤相关性不孕症的最佳卵巢刺激方案仍存在争议。在这项研究中,我们研究了两种卵巢刺激方案对子宫内膜异位瘤患者体外受精(IVF)/胞浆内精子注射(ICSI)结果的影响。方法:回顾性研究101例卵巢储备良好的子宫内膜异位症患者。在IVF或ICSI周期中,妇女接受促性腺激素释放激素(GnRH)激动剂(n=65)或GnRH拮抗剂(n=36)。观察两组临床及化学妊娠率、活产率、着床率、受精率及受精比例、流产率。结果:化学组(25%比28.6%)、临床组(19.6%比25%)、活产率(19.6%比25%)、着床率(11.7%比15%)两组间差异无统计学意义。两组的流产率、受精率、受精率无明显差异。结论:GnRH拮抗剂方案以治疗时间短、费用低为主要优势,可应用于子宫内膜异位瘤、卵巢储备良好的不孕症患者。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信