4.7 Article

Assisted hatching and intracytoplasmic sperm injection are not associated with improved outcomes in assisted reproduction cycles for diminished ovarian reserve: an analysis of cycles in the United States from 2004 to 2011

期刊

FERTILITY AND STERILITY
卷 102, 期 4, 页码 1041-U519

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.06.043

关键词

Diminished ovarian reserve; ICSI; assisted hatching; ART

资金

  1. NICHD NIH HHS [P50 HD068157, U54 HD068157, U54-HD-068157] Funding Source: Medline
  2. NIEHS NIH HHS [5P30ES013508-07, P30 ES013508] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To investigate the impact of intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) and assisted hatching (AH) on assisted reproductive technology (ART) outcomes in initial cycles with diminished ovarian reserve (DOR) as the primary diagnosis. Design: Retrospective cohort study of cycles from the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology (SART) Clinic Outcome Reporting System database. Setting: Not applicable. Patient(s): A total of 422,949 fresh, nondonor, initial ART cycles of which 8,597 were diagnosed with only elevated FSH and 38,926 were diagnosed with only DOR according to the SART DOR categorization. Intervention(s): None. Main Outcome Measure(s): Live birth and clinical pregnancy rates. Result(s): ICSI and AH were associated with diminished odds of live birth in SART DOR-only cycles (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 0.88, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.81-0.96 for ICSI; AOR 0.77, 95% CI 0.71-0.84 for AH). No association between odds of live birth and either ICSI or AH in elevated FSH-only cycles was observed. The combination of ICSI and AH was associated with significantly lower odds of live birth in SART DOR-only cycles but not in elevated FSH-only cycles. Conclusion(s): In initial ART cycles for which the only indication relates to a diagnosis of DOR, AH and ICSI are not associated with improved live birth rates. (C) 2014 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据