Comparison of assisted reproductive technology outcomes in infertile women with polycystic ovary syndrome: In vitro maturation, gnrh agonist, and gnrh antagonist cycles

30Citations
Citations of this article
32Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Objective: We compared the assisted reproductive technology (ART) outcomes among infertile women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) treated with IVM, conventional IVF, GnRH agonist, and GnRH antagonist cycles. Methods: The prospective study included a total of 67 cycles in 61 infertile women with PCOS. The women with PCOS were randomized into three IVF protocols: IVM/IVF with FSH and hCG priming with immature oocyte retrieval 38 hours later (group A, 14 cycles), GnRH agonist long protocol (group B, 14 cycles), and GnRH antagonist multi-dose flexible protocol (group C, 39 cycles). IVF outcomes, such as clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), implantation rate (IR), miscarriage rate (MR), and live birth rate (LBR), were compared among the three groups. Results: Age, BMI, and basal FSH and LH levels did not differ among the three groups. The number of retrieved oocytes and 2 pronucleus embryos was significantly lower in group A compared with groups B and C. The CPR, IR, MR, and LBR per embryo transfer showed no differences among the three groups. There was no incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome in group A. Conclusion: The IR, MR, and LBR in the IVM cycles were comparable to those of the GnRH agonist and GnRH antagonist cycles. The IVM protocol, FSH and hCG priming with oocyte retrieval 38 hours later, is an effective ART option that is comparable with conventional IVF for infertile women with PCOS. © 2012. The Korean Society for Reproductive Medicine.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Choi, M. H., Lee, S. H., Kim, H. O., Cha, S. H., Kim, J. Y., Yang, K. M., … Park, C. W. (2012). Comparison of assisted reproductive technology outcomes in infertile women with polycystic ovary syndrome: In vitro maturation, gnrh agonist, and gnrh antagonist cycles. Clinical and Experimental Reproductive Medicine, 39(4), 166–171. https://doi.org/10.5653/cerm.2012.39.4.166

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free