临床环境中的卵巢不良反应分类系统--是时候更新了?

IF 2.2 4区 医学 Q2 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Andres Reig, Emre Seli
{"title":"临床环境中的卵巢不良反应分类系统--是时候更新了?","authors":"Andres Reig, Emre Seli","doi":"10.1097/GCO.0000000000000950","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Poor ovarian response (POR) remains a key challenge to the success of assisted reproductive technology. Here, we offer a comprehensive review of the two main classification systems for POR, discussing their promises and pitfalls, evaluating their performance, and exploring potential avenues for improving upon these definitions of POR.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>The Bologna criteria represented the first meaningful attempt to create a universal POR definition. Subsequently, the POSEIDON classification system was published to provide a more nuanced view of POR, classifying patients into four groups based on age and ovarian reserve markers. A recent study evaluated the likelihood of achieving at least one euploid embryo for transfer and found that, indeed, these classification systems are effective predictors of this outcome.While these criteria provide an effective counseling tool, several limitations - not considering underlying conditions, selecting somewhat arbitrary cutoffs, and evaluating the number of oocytes retrieved regardless of maturity - highlight the importance of improving upon these systems to create a more useful tool to more accurately predict ovarian response for clinical and research purposes.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>In the era of personalized medicine, it is time to reconsider whether diagnostic criteria for a continuous metric such as ovarian response should be based on meeting all-or-nothing thresholds for specific parameters.</p>","PeriodicalId":55194,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Obstetrics & Gynecology","volume":"36 3","pages":"192-199"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Poor ovarian response classification systems in the clinical setting - time for an update?\",\"authors\":\"Andres Reig, Emre Seli\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/GCO.0000000000000950\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose of review: </strong>Poor ovarian response (POR) remains a key challenge to the success of assisted reproductive technology. Here, we offer a comprehensive review of the two main classification systems for POR, discussing their promises and pitfalls, evaluating their performance, and exploring potential avenues for improving upon these definitions of POR.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>The Bologna criteria represented the first meaningful attempt to create a universal POR definition. Subsequently, the POSEIDON classification system was published to provide a more nuanced view of POR, classifying patients into four groups based on age and ovarian reserve markers. A recent study evaluated the likelihood of achieving at least one euploid embryo for transfer and found that, indeed, these classification systems are effective predictors of this outcome.While these criteria provide an effective counseling tool, several limitations - not considering underlying conditions, selecting somewhat arbitrary cutoffs, and evaluating the number of oocytes retrieved regardless of maturity - highlight the importance of improving upon these systems to create a more useful tool to more accurately predict ovarian response for clinical and research purposes.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>In the era of personalized medicine, it is time to reconsider whether diagnostic criteria for a continuous metric such as ovarian response should be based on meeting all-or-nothing thresholds for specific parameters.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55194,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Opinion in Obstetrics & Gynecology\",\"volume\":\"36 3\",\"pages\":\"192-199\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Opinion in Obstetrics & Gynecology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/GCO.0000000000000950\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/3/27 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Opinion in Obstetrics & Gynecology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/GCO.0000000000000950","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

综述的目的:卵巢反应不良(POR)仍然是辅助生殖技术取得成功的主要挑战。在此,我们对 POR 的两个主要分类系统进行了全面回顾,讨论了它们的优点和缺陷,评估了它们的性能,并探讨了改进这些 POR 定义的潜在途径:博洛尼亚标准是为创建一个通用的 POR 定义所做的第一次有意义的尝试。随后发布的 POSEIDON 分类系统对 POR 进行了更细致的分类,根据年龄和卵巢储备指标将患者分为四组。虽然这些标准提供了有效的咨询工具,但也存在一些局限性--没有考虑潜在的疾病、选择的临界点有些武断、评估取回的卵母细胞数量与成熟度无关--这些都凸显了对这些系统进行改进的重要性,以创建一个更有用的工具,为临床和研究目的更准确地预测卵巢反应。总结:在个性化医疗时代,是时候重新考虑卵巢反应等连续性指标的诊断标准是否应基于满足特定参数的全有或全无阈值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Poor ovarian response classification systems in the clinical setting - time for an update?

Purpose of review: Poor ovarian response (POR) remains a key challenge to the success of assisted reproductive technology. Here, we offer a comprehensive review of the two main classification systems for POR, discussing their promises and pitfalls, evaluating their performance, and exploring potential avenues for improving upon these definitions of POR.

Recent findings: The Bologna criteria represented the first meaningful attempt to create a universal POR definition. Subsequently, the POSEIDON classification system was published to provide a more nuanced view of POR, classifying patients into four groups based on age and ovarian reserve markers. A recent study evaluated the likelihood of achieving at least one euploid embryo for transfer and found that, indeed, these classification systems are effective predictors of this outcome.While these criteria provide an effective counseling tool, several limitations - not considering underlying conditions, selecting somewhat arbitrary cutoffs, and evaluating the number of oocytes retrieved regardless of maturity - highlight the importance of improving upon these systems to create a more useful tool to more accurately predict ovarian response for clinical and research purposes.

Summary: In the era of personalized medicine, it is time to reconsider whether diagnostic criteria for a continuous metric such as ovarian response should be based on meeting all-or-nothing thresholds for specific parameters.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
104
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: ​​​​​​​Current Opinion in Obstetrics and Gynecology is a bimonthly publication offering a unique and wide ranging perspective on the key developments in the field. Each issue features hand-picked review articles from our team of expert editors. With eleven disciplines published across the year – including reproductive endocrinology, gynecologic cancer and fertility– every issue also contains annotated references detailing the merits of the most important papers.
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信