Comparison of the standard GnRH antagonist protocol and the luteal phase estradiol/ GnRH antagonist priming protocol in poor ovarian responders

3Citations
Citations of this article
10Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

Background/aim: The aim of the study was to compare the luteal estradiol patch/GnRH antagonists priming protocol (LPP) with the standard GnRH antagonist protocol in poor ovarian responders (PORs) in terms of the outcomes of in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment Materials and methods: IVF outcomes of 265 cycles in 265 patients (106 in the LPP group, 159 in the standard GnRH antagonist group) were evaluated retrospectively. Results: Mean length of stimulation (11.4 ± 2.7 vs. 10.0 ± 2.7 days; P < 0.05) and the total gonadotropin dose (3403 ± 1060 vs. 2984 ± 1112) used were significantly greater in the LPP group than in the standard GnRH antagonist protocol group. The mean number of oocytes retrieved (3.5 ± 2.6 vs. 3.7 ± 2.8), the number of mature oocytes (2.8 ± 2.2 vs. 2.6 ± 2.2), fertilization rates (65% vs. 62%), the number of embryos transferred (1.6 ± 0.6 vs. 1.7 ± 0.6), and implantation rates (16% vs. 13%) were similar. The cancellation rate did not significantly differ between the groups (9.4% vs. 13.2%). There were no significant differences in the clinical pregnancy (11.3% vs. 13.2%) or live birth rates per patient (3.8% vs. 9.4%) and clinical pregnancy (18.8% vs. 22.6%) or live birth rates per embryo transfer (6.3% vs. 12.9%) between the groups. Conclusion: LPP does not improve IVF outcomes when compared with the standard GnRH antagonist protocol in PORs.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Mutlu, M. F., Mutlu, İ., Erdem, M., Güler, İ., & Erdem, A. (2017). Comparison of the standard GnRH antagonist protocol and the luteal phase estradiol/ GnRH antagonist priming protocol in poor ovarian responders. Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences, 47(2), 470–475. https://doi.org/10.3906/sag-1602-111

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