卵巢反应差和自然周期和修改自然周期的可能作用。

IF 3.1 Q1 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Therapeutic advances in reproductive health Pub Date : 2022-01-14 eCollection Date: 2022-01-01 DOI:10.1177/26334941211062026
Federica Di Guardo, Christophe Blockeel, Michel De Vos, Marco Palumbo, Nikolaos Christoforidis, Herman Tournaye, Panagiotis Drakopoulos
{"title":"卵巢反应差和自然周期和修改自然周期的可能作用。","authors":"Federica Di Guardo,&nbsp;Christophe Blockeel,&nbsp;Michel De Vos,&nbsp;Marco Palumbo,&nbsp;Nikolaos Christoforidis,&nbsp;Herman Tournaye,&nbsp;Panagiotis Drakopoulos","doi":"10.1177/26334941211062026","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>About 20% of women undergoing <i>in vitro</i> fertilization struggle with poor ovarian response, indicating a poor prognosis related to low response following ovarian stimulation. Indeed, poor ovarian response, that is associated with both high cancelation rates and low live birth rates, still represents one of the most important therapeutic challenges in <i>in vitro</i> fertilization. In this context, natural cycle/modified natural cycle-<i>in vitro</i> fertilization, as a 'milder' approach, could be a reasonable alternative to high-dose/conventional ovarian stimulation in poor ovarian responders, with the aim to retrieve a single oocyte with better characteristics that may result in a single top-quality embryo, transferred to a more receptive endometrium. Moreover, modified natural cycle-<i>in vitro</i> fertilization may be cost-effective because of the reduced gonadotropin consumption. Several studies have been published during the last 20 years reporting conflicting results regarding the use of natural cycle/modified natural cycle-<i>in vitro</i> fertilization in women with poor ovarian response; however, while most of the studies concluded that mild stimulation regimens, including natural cycle/modified natural cycle-<i>in vitro</i> fertilization, have low, but acceptable success rates in this difficult group of patients, others did not replicate these findings. The aim of this narrative review is to appraise the current evidence regarding the use of natural cycle/modified natural cycle-<i>in vitro</i> fertilization in poor ovarian responders.</p>","PeriodicalId":75219,"journal":{"name":"Therapeutic advances in reproductive health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/93/6d/10.1177_26334941211062026.PMC8771731.pdf","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Poor ovarian response and the possible role of natural and modified natural cycles.\",\"authors\":\"Federica Di Guardo,&nbsp;Christophe Blockeel,&nbsp;Michel De Vos,&nbsp;Marco Palumbo,&nbsp;Nikolaos Christoforidis,&nbsp;Herman Tournaye,&nbsp;Panagiotis Drakopoulos\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/26334941211062026\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>About 20% of women undergoing <i>in vitro</i> fertilization struggle with poor ovarian response, indicating a poor prognosis related to low response following ovarian stimulation. Indeed, poor ovarian response, that is associated with both high cancelation rates and low live birth rates, still represents one of the most important therapeutic challenges in <i>in vitro</i> fertilization. In this context, natural cycle/modified natural cycle-<i>in vitro</i> fertilization, as a 'milder' approach, could be a reasonable alternative to high-dose/conventional ovarian stimulation in poor ovarian responders, with the aim to retrieve a single oocyte with better characteristics that may result in a single top-quality embryo, transferred to a more receptive endometrium. Moreover, modified natural cycle-<i>in vitro</i> fertilization may be cost-effective because of the reduced gonadotropin consumption. Several studies have been published during the last 20 years reporting conflicting results regarding the use of natural cycle/modified natural cycle-<i>in vitro</i> fertilization in women with poor ovarian response; however, while most of the studies concluded that mild stimulation regimens, including natural cycle/modified natural cycle-<i>in vitro</i> fertilization, have low, but acceptable success rates in this difficult group of patients, others did not replicate these findings. The aim of this narrative review is to appraise the current evidence regarding the use of natural cycle/modified natural cycle-<i>in vitro</i> fertilization in poor ovarian responders.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":75219,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Therapeutic advances in reproductive health\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-01-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/93/6d/10.1177_26334941211062026.PMC8771731.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Therapeutic advances in reproductive health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/26334941211062026\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2022/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Therapeutic advances in reproductive health","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/26334941211062026","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2022/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

约20%接受体外受精的女性卵巢反应差,表明卵巢刺激后反应低与预后不良有关。事实上,卵巢反应差,与高取消率和低活产率相关,仍然是体外受精治疗中最重要的挑战之一。在这种情况下,自然周期/改良自然周期体外受精作为一种“温和”的方法,可能是高剂量/传统卵巢刺激的合理替代方法,目的是获得具有更好特征的单个卵母细胞,从而可能产生单个高质量的胚胎,转移到更容易接受的子宫内膜。此外,改良的自然周期体外受精可能具有成本效益,因为减少了促性腺激素的消耗。在过去20年中发表的几项研究报告了关于在卵巢反应差的妇女中使用自然周期/改良自然周期体外受精的相互矛盾的结果;然而,虽然大多数研究得出结论,温和的刺激方案,包括自然周期/改良自然周期体外受精,在这一困难的患者群体中具有低但可接受的成功率,但其他研究没有重复这些发现。这篇叙述性综述的目的是评估目前关于在卵巢反应不良的患者中使用自然周期/改良自然周期体外受精的证据。
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 and the possible role of natural and modified natural cycles.

Poor ovarian response and the possible role of natural and modified natural cycles.

Poor ovarian response and the possible role of natural and modified natural cycles.

Poor ovarian response and the possible role of natural and modified natural cycles.

About 20% of women undergoing in vitro fertilization struggle with poor ovarian response, indicating a poor prognosis related to low response following ovarian stimulation. Indeed, poor ovarian response, that is associated with both high cancelation rates and low live birth rates, still represents one of the most important therapeutic challenges in in vitro fertilization. In this context, natural cycle/modified natural cycle-in vitro fertilization, as a 'milder' approach, could be a reasonable alternative to high-dose/conventional ovarian stimulation in poor ovarian responders, with the aim to retrieve a single oocyte with better characteristics that may result in a single top-quality embryo, transferred to a more receptive endometrium. Moreover, modified natural cycle-in vitro fertilization may be cost-effective because of the reduced gonadotropin consumption. Several studies have been published during the last 20 years reporting conflicting results regarding the use of natural cycle/modified natural cycle-in vitro fertilization in women with poor ovarian response; however, while most of the studies concluded that mild stimulation regimens, including natural cycle/modified natural cycle-in vitro fertilization, have low, but acceptable success rates in this difficult group of patients, others did not replicate these findings. The aim of this narrative review is to appraise the current evidence regarding the use of natural cycle/modified natural cycle-in vitro fertilization in poor ovarian responders.

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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
7 weeks
×
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