4种卵巢刺激方案对波塞冬组3/4例子宫腺肌症患者的累计活产率分析

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q2 GENETICS & HEREDITY
Jiayi Guo, Jintao Peng, Yajie Chang, Yanfang Wang, Xiaoyan Liang, Rui Xiang
{"title":"4种卵巢刺激方案对波塞冬组3/4例子宫腺肌症患者的累计活产率分析","authors":"Jiayi Guo, Jintao Peng, Yajie Chang, Yanfang Wang, Xiaoyan Liang, Rui Xiang","doi":"10.1007/s10815-025-03488-4","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the effects of the gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist protocol, GnRH antagonist protocol, progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) protocol, and mild stimulation/natural cycle protocol on the cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) in patients with adenomyosis and Poseidon group 3/4.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 1090 patients diagnosed with adenomyosis and Poseidon groups 3/4 group who underwent in vitro fertilization (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) from January 2013 to December 2020 were included. Demographic characteristics, laboratory indicators, and clinical outcomes of the four ovarian stimulation protocols were compared. The primary outcome was the CLBR, with binary logistic regression analysis used to explore the factors influencing CLBR.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the patients with adenomyosis and Poseidon groups 3/4, the CLBR in GnRH agonist protocol group was higher than that in PPOS protocol group (45.78% vs. 22.33%, P = 0.005). Binary logistic regression analysis revealed that GnRH agonist protocol had a higher CLBR compared to PPOS protocol (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 3.26, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.56-6.83, P = 0.002), while no significant differences were found when comparing PPOS protocol with GnRH antagonist protocol (P = 0.093) and mild stimulation/natural cycle protocol (P = 0.125). In the < 35 years subgroup, the CLBR of GnRH agonist protocol was significantly higher (55.26% vs. 33.82%; P = 0.032), which wasn't observed in elder subgroups (P > 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>For patients with both adenomyosis and Poseidon groups 3/4, GnRH agonist protocol showed a higher CLBR, especially in patients < 35 years (Poseidon group 3).</p>","PeriodicalId":15246,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics","volume":" ","pages":"1939-1947"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12229373/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Analysis of cumulative live birth rate outcomes of four ovarian stimulation protocols in Poseidon groups 3/4 patients with adenomyosis.\",\"authors\":\"Jiayi Guo, Jintao Peng, Yajie Chang, Yanfang Wang, Xiaoyan Liang, Rui Xiang\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10815-025-03488-4\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>To compare the effects of the gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist protocol, GnRH antagonist protocol, progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) protocol, and mild stimulation/natural cycle protocol on the cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) in patients with adenomyosis and Poseidon group 3/4.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A total of 1090 patients diagnosed with adenomyosis and Poseidon groups 3/4 group who underwent in vitro fertilization (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) from January 2013 to December 2020 were included. Demographic characteristics, laboratory indicators, and clinical outcomes of the four ovarian stimulation protocols were compared. The primary outcome was the CLBR, with binary logistic regression analysis used to explore the factors influencing CLBR.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among the patients with adenomyosis and Poseidon groups 3/4, the CLBR in GnRH agonist protocol group was higher than that in PPOS protocol group (45.78% vs. 22.33%, P = 0.005). Binary logistic regression analysis revealed that GnRH agonist protocol had a higher CLBR compared to PPOS protocol (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 3.26, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.56-6.83, P = 0.002), while no significant differences were found when comparing PPOS protocol with GnRH antagonist protocol (P = 0.093) and mild stimulation/natural cycle protocol (P = 0.125). In the < 35 years subgroup, the CLBR of GnRH agonist protocol was significantly higher (55.26% vs. 33.82%; P = 0.032), which wasn't observed in elder subgroups (P > 0.05).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>For patients with both adenomyosis and Poseidon groups 3/4, GnRH agonist protocol showed a higher CLBR, especially in patients < 35 years (Poseidon group 3).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15246,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1939-1947\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12229373/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-025-03488-4\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/5/9 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"GENETICS & HEREDITY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-025-03488-4","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/9 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:比较促性腺激素释放激素(GnRH)激动剂方案、GnRH拮抗剂方案、黄体酮刺激卵巢(PPOS)方案和轻度刺激/自然周期方案对子宫腺肌症和Poseidon组3/4患者累积活产率(CLBR)的影响。方法:选取2013年1月至2020年12月接受体外受精(IVF)或胞浆内单精子注射(ICSI)治疗的确诊为子宫腺肌症和Poseidon组3/4组患者1090例。比较四种卵巢刺激方案的人口学特征、实验室指标和临床结果。主要指标为CLBR,采用二元logistic回归分析探讨影响CLBR的因素。结果:子宫腺肌症组和Poseidon组3/4组患者中,GnRH激动剂方案组CLBR高于PPOS方案组(45.78%比22.33%,P = 0.005)。二元logistic回归分析显示,GnRH激动剂方案的CLBR高于PPOS方案(调整优势比(aOR) 3.26, 95%可信区间(CI): 1.56 ~ 6.83, P = 0.002),而PPOS方案与GnRH拮抗剂方案(P = 0.093)和轻度刺激/自然循环方案(P = 0.125)比较无显著差异。0.05)。结论:对于子宫腺肌症组和Poseidon组3/4组患者,GnRH激动剂方案均显示更高的CLBR,特别是在患者中
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Analysis of cumulative live birth rate outcomes of four ovarian stimulation protocols in Poseidon groups 3/4 patients with adenomyosis.

Purpose: To compare the effects of the gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist protocol, GnRH antagonist protocol, progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) protocol, and mild stimulation/natural cycle protocol on the cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) in patients with adenomyosis and Poseidon group 3/4.

Methods: A total of 1090 patients diagnosed with adenomyosis and Poseidon groups 3/4 group who underwent in vitro fertilization (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) from January 2013 to December 2020 were included. Demographic characteristics, laboratory indicators, and clinical outcomes of the four ovarian stimulation protocols were compared. The primary outcome was the CLBR, with binary logistic regression analysis used to explore the factors influencing CLBR.

Results: Among the patients with adenomyosis and Poseidon groups 3/4, the CLBR in GnRH agonist protocol group was higher than that in PPOS protocol group (45.78% vs. 22.33%, P = 0.005). Binary logistic regression analysis revealed that GnRH agonist protocol had a higher CLBR compared to PPOS protocol (adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 3.26, 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.56-6.83, P = 0.002), while no significant differences were found when comparing PPOS protocol with GnRH antagonist protocol (P = 0.093) and mild stimulation/natural cycle protocol (P = 0.125). In the < 35 years subgroup, the CLBR of GnRH agonist protocol was significantly higher (55.26% vs. 33.82%; P = 0.032), which wasn't observed in elder subgroups (P > 0.05).

Conclusion: For patients with both adenomyosis and Poseidon groups 3/4, GnRH agonist protocol showed a higher CLBR, especially in patients < 35 years (Poseidon group 3).

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
5.70
自引率
9.70%
发文量
286
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: The Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics publishes cellular, molecular, genetic, and epigenetic discoveries advancing our understanding of the biology and underlying mechanisms from gametogenesis to offspring health. Special emphasis is placed on the practice and evolution of assisted reproduction technologies (ARTs) with reference to the diagnosis and management of diseases affecting fertility. Our goal is to educate our readership in the translation of basic and clinical discoveries made from human or relevant animal models to the safe and efficacious practice of human ARTs. The scientific rigor and ethical standards embraced by the JARG editorial team ensures a broad international base of expertise guiding the marriage of contemporary clinical research paradigms with basic science discovery. JARG publishes original papers, minireviews, case reports, and opinion pieces often combined into special topic issues that will educate clinicians and scientists with interests in the mechanisms of human development that bear on the treatment of infertility and emerging innovations in human ARTs. The guiding principles of male and female reproductive health impacting pre- and post-conceptional viability and developmental potential are emphasized within the purview of human reproductive health in current and future generations of our species. The journal is published in cooperation with the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, an organization of more than 8,000 physicians, researchers, nurses, technicians and other professionals dedicated to advancing knowledge and expertise in reproductive biology.
×
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