Is there an ideal stimulation regimen for IVF for poor responders and does it change with age?
- 117 Downloads
To determine whether there is a superior treatment modality for ‘poor’ responders.
Retrospective analysis of three stimulation regimens, with patients stratified based on age, stimulation regime and response in previous cycles (“poor’ responder or “non poor” responder). Fertilisation, embryo utilisation and clinical pregnancy rates were assessed. There were a total of 1,608 cycles in the ‘poor’ responder and 8,489 cycles in the ‘non poor’ responder groups.
In ‘poor’ responders there was no significant difference in fertilisation rate, nor utilisation rate between the three stimulation regimes and no differences in the pregnancy rate/initiated cycle irrespective of age and stimulation regimen in any of the groups. ‘Non poor’ responders had a significantly greater pregnancy rate/initiated cycle for all stimulation regimens in both age groups compared with ‘poor’ responders.
This large retrospective study of ‘poor’ responders has not shown a difference in pregnancy rates/initiated cycle between stimulation regimens.
KeywordsIVF success Poor responder Stimulation regimen
- 6.Speroff L, Glass RL, Kase NG. Clinical Gynaecologic Endocrinology and Infertility. 6th Edition. Baltimore, MD: Lippincott Williams and Wilkins, 19995. Nikolaou D, Templeton A: Early ovarian ageing: A hypothesis. Detection and clinical relevance. Hum Reprod 2003;18:1137–9. doi: 10.1093/humrep/deg245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 10.Scott RT, Hofmann GE, Oehninger S, Muasher SJ.. Intercycle variability of day 3 follicle-stimulating hormone concentrations and its effect on stimulation quality in in-vitro fertilization. Fertility &. Sterility 1990;54:297–302.Google Scholar
- 19.Tarlatzis BC, Kirou D, Venetis CA. Management of poor response: Facts or myths In Advances in Fertility Studies and Reproductive Medicine, IFFS 2007 In: Kruger TF, Van Der Spuy Z, Kempers RD editors. Juta & Co Ltd; 2007. p. 311–318.Google Scholar
- 20.Daya S. Gonadotropin releasing hormone agonist protocols for pituitary desensitization in an in vitro fertilization and gamete intrafallopian transfer cycles (Cochrane Review). In: The Cochrane Library, Issue 1, 2000. Oxford: Update Software.Google Scholar
- 21.Akman MA, Erden HF, Tosun SB, Bayazitet N, Aksoy E, Bahceci M. Comparison of agonistic flare-up protocol and antagonistic multiple dose protocol in ovarian stimulation of poor responders: results of a prospective randomized trial. Hum Reprod. 2001;16:868–70. doi: 10.1093/humrep/16.5.868.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 26.Dirnfield M, Gonen Y, Lissak A, Goldman S, Koifman M, Sorokin Y. A randomized prospective study on the effect of short and long buserelin treatment in women with repeated unsuccessful in-vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles due to inadequate ovarian response. J In Vitro Fert Embryo Transf. 1991;8:339–43. doi: 10.1007/BF01133025.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 28.Dirnfield M, Fruchter O, Yshai D, et al. Cessation of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogue (GnRH-a) upon down-regulation versus conventional long GnRH: A protocol in poor responders undergoing in vitro-fertilization. Fertil Steril. 1999;72:406–11. doi: 10.1016/S0015–0282(99)00289–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 29.Garcia-Velasco JA, Isaza V, Requena A, et al. High doses of gonadotrophins combined with stop versus non-stop protocol of GnRH analogue administration in low responder IVF patients; a prospective, randomized, controlled trial. Hum Reprod. 2000;15:2292–6. doi: 10.1093/humrep/15.11.2292.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar