4.2 Article

Comparative Effectiveness of Three Ovarian Hyperstimulation Protocol in In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) Cycles for Women with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome

Journal

MEDICAL SCIENCE MONITOR
Volume 24, Issue -, Pages 9424-9428

Publisher

INT SCIENTIFIC INFORMATION, INC
DOI: 10.12659/MSM.913757

Keywords

Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome; Ovulation Induction; Polycystic Ovary Syndrome

Funding

  1. Wenzhou Science and Technology Bureau [Y20150222]
  2. Zhejiang population and family planning conmmission [2014KYB343]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate the efficacy of specific in vitro fertilization (IVF) protocols for patients with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), and therefore, analyze the first-rank intention IVF protocol. Material/Methods: In this study, 408 PCOS patients (464 treatment cycles) were enrolled and assigned to one of 3 groups: group 1 [oral contraceptive long-term regimen group (OC-L protocol group, n=91)], group 2 (GnRH antagonist protocol, n=80), and group 3 [follicular phase long-term regimen group, C-1-L protocol group n=293]. The endpoints are the number of eggs, oocyte maturation rate, high-quality embryo rate and clinical pregnancy rate after fresh embryos transfer, the incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome and abortion rate. Results: The number of eggs, oocyte maturation rate, and high-quality embryo rate in the C-1-L protocol group were significantly higher than those in the other 2 groups. The fertilization rate and cleavage rate of the 3 groups were not significantly different. After fresh embryo transplantation, the pregnancy rate of C-1-L protocol group was significantly higher than that of the other groups. Conclusions: This study showed that the super-long downregulation in follicular phase regimen has advantages of simple treatment process, high oocyte maturation rate, high quality embryo rate, and pregnancy rate. It is a good choice for PCOS patients to promote ovulation during IVF.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available