细胞质内精子注射周期中的激动剂和拮抗剂:哪个是最好的?

IF 0.8 Q4 REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY
Bushra J. Al Mousawi, M. Azzam, B. Zahawi, Hayder Adnan Fawzi
{"title":"细胞质内精子注射周期中的激动剂和拮抗剂:哪个是最好的?","authors":"Bushra J. Al Mousawi, M. Azzam, B. Zahawi, Hayder Adnan Fawzi","doi":"10.15296/ijwhr.2020.46","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n Objectives: The comparison of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist against GnRH antagonists regarding the pregnancy rate and effect of various predictors on pregnancy outcomes. Materials and Methods: This prospective comparative study involved 189 women who underwent intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles and were divided into agonist (107 patients) and antagonist arm (82 patients) groups. The chemical and clinical pregnancy rate was the main outcome and the other outcomes included the number and quality of oocyte measurement and pregnancy outcomes. Results: Based on the results, the agonist protocol showed a higher rate of pregnancy (32.7%, 95% CI: 23.9-42.4%) compared to the antagonist protocol (22.0%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 13.6-32.5%) with the odds ratio (OR) of (95% CI) = 1.73 (0.89-3.35). The results further revealed that the count of retrieved oocytes, count of M2 oocytes, count of fertilized oocytes, count of embryos, and the fertilization percent out of total retrieved oocytes were higher in the agonist arm compared to the antagonist arm. In the multivariate analysis after adjusting for the confounders, the agonist protocol had higher odds of a successful pregnancy compared to the antagonist protocol by 57% (partial OR = 1.57, P value = 0.23). Conclusions: In general, the agonist protocol offers a favourable outcome in comparison to the antagonist arm, and there seems to be an intrinsic benefit for the agonist protocol, which is not explained by the higher number of transferred embryos.","PeriodicalId":14346,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Women's Health and Reproduction Sciences","volume":"76 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2019-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Agonist Versus Antagonist in Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection Cycles: Which Is the Best?\",\"authors\":\"Bushra J. Al Mousawi, M. Azzam, B. Zahawi, Hayder Adnan Fawzi\",\"doi\":\"10.15296/ijwhr.2020.46\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\n Objectives: The comparison of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist against GnRH antagonists regarding the pregnancy rate and effect of various predictors on pregnancy outcomes. Materials and Methods: This prospective comparative study involved 189 women who underwent intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles and were divided into agonist (107 patients) and antagonist arm (82 patients) groups. The chemical and clinical pregnancy rate was the main outcome and the other outcomes included the number and quality of oocyte measurement and pregnancy outcomes. Results: Based on the results, the agonist protocol showed a higher rate of pregnancy (32.7%, 95% CI: 23.9-42.4%) compared to the antagonist protocol (22.0%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 13.6-32.5%) with the odds ratio (OR) of (95% CI) = 1.73 (0.89-3.35). The results further revealed that the count of retrieved oocytes, count of M2 oocytes, count of fertilized oocytes, count of embryos, and the fertilization percent out of total retrieved oocytes were higher in the agonist arm compared to the antagonist arm. In the multivariate analysis after adjusting for the confounders, the agonist protocol had higher odds of a successful pregnancy compared to the antagonist protocol by 57% (partial OR = 1.57, P value = 0.23). Conclusions: In general, the agonist protocol offers a favourable outcome in comparison to the antagonist arm, and there seems to be an intrinsic benefit for the agonist protocol, which is not explained by the higher number of transferred embryos.\",\"PeriodicalId\":14346,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal of Women's Health and Reproduction Sciences\",\"volume\":\"76 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal of Women's Health and Reproduction Sciences\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15296/ijwhr.2020.46\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Women's Health and Reproduction Sciences","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15296/ijwhr.2020.46","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY","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)激动剂与GnRH拮抗剂的妊娠率及各种预测因素对妊娠结局的影响。材料和方法:这项前瞻性比较研究涉及189名接受卵胞浆内单精子注射(ICSI)周期的妇女,分为激动剂组(107例)和拮抗剂组(82例)。化学妊娠率和临床妊娠率是主要指标,其他指标包括卵母细胞计数和质量以及妊娠结局。结果:基于结果,激动剂方案的妊娠率(32.7%,95% CI: 23.9-42.4%)高于拮抗剂方案(22.0%,95%可信区间(CI): 13.6-32.5%),优势比(OR) (95% CI) = 1.73(0.89-3.35)。结果进一步表明,与拮抗剂组相比,激动剂组获得的卵母细胞数、M2卵母细胞数、受精卵数、胚胎数和受精卵占总卵母细胞的百分比更高。在调整混杂因素后的多因素分析中,与拮抗剂方案相比,激动剂方案的成功妊娠几率高57%(部分OR = 1.57, P值= 0.23)。结论:总的来说,与拮抗剂组相比,激动剂方案提供了一个有利的结果,并且激动剂方案似乎有一个内在的好处,这并不能用更高数量的移植胚胎来解释。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Agonist Versus Antagonist in Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection Cycles: Which Is the Best?
Objectives: The comparison of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist against GnRH antagonists regarding the pregnancy rate and effect of various predictors on pregnancy outcomes. Materials and Methods: This prospective comparative study involved 189 women who underwent intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles and were divided into agonist (107 patients) and antagonist arm (82 patients) groups. The chemical and clinical pregnancy rate was the main outcome and the other outcomes included the number and quality of oocyte measurement and pregnancy outcomes. Results: Based on the results, the agonist protocol showed a higher rate of pregnancy (32.7%, 95% CI: 23.9-42.4%) compared to the antagonist protocol (22.0%, 95% confidence interval (CI): 13.6-32.5%) with the odds ratio (OR) of (95% CI) = 1.73 (0.89-3.35). The results further revealed that the count of retrieved oocytes, count of M2 oocytes, count of fertilized oocytes, count of embryos, and the fertilization percent out of total retrieved oocytes were higher in the agonist arm compared to the antagonist arm. In the multivariate analysis after adjusting for the confounders, the agonist protocol had higher odds of a successful pregnancy compared to the antagonist protocol by 57% (partial OR = 1.57, P value = 0.23). Conclusions: In general, the agonist protocol offers a favourable outcome in comparison to the antagonist arm, and there seems to be an intrinsic benefit for the agonist protocol, which is not explained by the higher number of transferred embryos.
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
1.60
自引率
14.30%
发文量
8
期刊介绍: All kind of knowledge contributing to the development of science by its content, value, level and originality will be covered by IJWHR. Problems of public health and their solutions are at the head of the windows opening us to the world. The "International Journal of Women''s Health and Reproduction Sciences” is a modern forum for scientific communication, covering all aspects women health and reproduction sciences, in basic and clinical sciences, mainly including: -Medical Education in Women Health and Reproduction Sciences -Cardiology in Women Health-Related Reproductive Problems -Sports Medicine in Women Health and Reproduction Sciences -Psychiatry in Women Health-Related Reproductive Problems -Antioxidant Therapy in Reproduction Medicine Sciences -Nutrition in Women Health and Reproduction Sciences -Defense Androgen and Estrogen -Fertility and Infertility -Urogynecology -Endometriosis -Endocrinology -Breast Cancer -Menopause -Puberty -Eroticism -Pregnancy -Preterm Birth -Vaginal Diseases -Sex-Based Biology -Surgical Procedures -Nursing in Pregnancy -Obstetrics/Gynecology -Polycystic Ovary Syndrome -Hyperandrogenism in Females -Menstrual Syndrome and Complications -Oncology of Female Reproductive Organs -Traditional Medicine in Women Reproductive Health -Ultrasound in Women Health Reproduction sciences -Stem Cell Research In Women Reproduction Sciences -Complementary Medicine in Women Reproductive Health -Female Sexual Dysfunction: Pathophysiology & Treatment
×
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