Jiaxin Lv, Wei Guo, Tian Tian, Lixue Chen, Xiumei Zhen, Rong Li, Jie Qiao, Rui Yang
{"title":"2015年至2023年,13000多名卵巢应答不良者的累计活产率:一项评估自然周期和控制卵巢刺激疗效的回顾性队列研究","authors":"Jiaxin Lv, Wei Guo, Tian Tian, Lixue Chen, Xiumei Zhen, Rong Li, Jie Qiao, Rui Yang","doi":"10.1007/s10815-025-03544-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Natural cycle in vitro fertilization (NC-IVF) represents a convenient and safe assisted reproductive technology, making it particularly advantageous for patients with poor ovarian response (POR). This research evaluates the effectiveness of NC-IVF for women with POR, aiming to inform personalized treatment decisions.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>This retrospective cohort study encompassed 13,013 cycles involving women diagnosed with poor ovarian response according to the Bologna criteria. These patients underwent either natural cycles or controlled ovarian stimulation cycles. The primary outcome measure was the cumulative live birth rates, and the secondary outcomes included laboratory and clinical outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 1073 natural cycles and 11,940 COS cycles were analyzed, with 5956 undergoing low-dose gonadotropin treatment and 5984 receiving high-dose gonadotropin. The basic characteristics were comparable among the three groups. In both fresh and frozen embryo transfer cycles, clinical pregnancy rates, implantation rates, and live birth rates were comparable across all three groups. Furthermore, no statistically significant differences were observed in cumulative live birth rates or time to first live birth between the groups examined. Expenditures in the natural cycle group were substantially lower than those in both COS cohorts. Importantly, further analysis indicated that there were no significant differences among the three groups concerning either pregnancy complications or neonatal outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our findings indicate that for women demonstrating a poor ovarian response, NC treatment yields comparable pregnancy and live birth rates when compared to controlled ovarian stimulation methods. The natural cycle represents a safe, effective, and economically viable treatment option for this patient population.</p>","PeriodicalId":15246,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Cumulative live birth rates among over 13,000 poor ovarian responders from 2015 to 2023: a retrospective cohort study assessing the efficacy of natural cycle and controlled ovarian stimulation.\",\"authors\":\"Jiaxin Lv, Wei Guo, Tian Tian, Lixue Chen, Xiumei Zhen, Rong Li, Jie Qiao, Rui Yang\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10815-025-03544-z\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Natural cycle in vitro fertilization (NC-IVF) represents a convenient and safe assisted reproductive technology, making it particularly advantageous for patients with poor ovarian response (POR). This research evaluates the effectiveness of NC-IVF for women with POR, aiming to inform personalized treatment decisions.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>This retrospective cohort study encompassed 13,013 cycles involving women diagnosed with poor ovarian response according to the Bologna criteria. These patients underwent either natural cycles or controlled ovarian stimulation cycles. The primary outcome measure was the cumulative live birth rates, and the secondary outcomes included laboratory and clinical outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 1073 natural cycles and 11,940 COS cycles were analyzed, with 5956 undergoing low-dose gonadotropin treatment and 5984 receiving high-dose gonadotropin. The basic characteristics were comparable among the three groups. In both fresh and frozen embryo transfer cycles, clinical pregnancy rates, implantation rates, and live birth rates were comparable across all three groups. Furthermore, no statistically significant differences were observed in cumulative live birth rates or time to first live birth between the groups examined. Expenditures in the natural cycle group were substantially lower than those in both COS cohorts. Importantly, further analysis indicated that there were no significant differences among the three groups concerning either pregnancy complications or neonatal outcomes.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Our findings indicate that for women demonstrating a poor ovarian response, NC treatment yields comparable pregnancy and live birth rates when compared to controlled ovarian stimulation methods. The natural cycle represents a safe, effective, and economically viable treatment option for this patient population.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":15246,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-025-03544-z\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"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/s10815-025-03544-z","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Cumulative live birth rates among over 13,000 poor ovarian responders from 2015 to 2023: a retrospective cohort study assessing the efficacy of natural cycle and controlled ovarian stimulation.
Background: Natural cycle in vitro fertilization (NC-IVF) represents a convenient and safe assisted reproductive technology, making it particularly advantageous for patients with poor ovarian response (POR). This research evaluates the effectiveness of NC-IVF for women with POR, aiming to inform personalized treatment decisions.
Method: This retrospective cohort study encompassed 13,013 cycles involving women diagnosed with poor ovarian response according to the Bologna criteria. These patients underwent either natural cycles or controlled ovarian stimulation cycles. The primary outcome measure was the cumulative live birth rates, and the secondary outcomes included laboratory and clinical outcomes.
Results: A total of 1073 natural cycles and 11,940 COS cycles were analyzed, with 5956 undergoing low-dose gonadotropin treatment and 5984 receiving high-dose gonadotropin. The basic characteristics were comparable among the three groups. In both fresh and frozen embryo transfer cycles, clinical pregnancy rates, implantation rates, and live birth rates were comparable across all three groups. Furthermore, no statistically significant differences were observed in cumulative live birth rates or time to first live birth between the groups examined. Expenditures in the natural cycle group were substantially lower than those in both COS cohorts. Importantly, further analysis indicated that there were no significant differences among the three groups concerning either pregnancy complications or neonatal outcomes.
Conclusion: Our findings indicate that for women demonstrating a poor ovarian response, NC treatment yields comparable pregnancy and live birth rates when compared to controlled ovarian stimulation methods. The natural cycle represents a safe, effective, and economically viable treatment option for this patient population.
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.