4.6 Article

Does daily co administration of gonadotropins and letrozole during the ovarian stimulation improve IVF outcome for poor and sub optimal responders?

Journal

JOURNAL OF OVARIAN RESEARCH
Volume 13, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s13048-020-00666-z

Keywords

Letrozole; Aromatase inhibitors; Poor responders; Androgens; IVF

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background Co-administration of letrozole during the first 5 days of ovarian stimulation was suggested to improve IVF outcomes in poor responders. We aimed to determine whether poor/sub-optimal responders might benefit from Letrozole co-treatment throughout the entire stimulation course. Methods We retrospectively reviewed the medical files of women who demonstrated poor (oocyte yield <= 3) and sub-optimal (4 <= oocyte yield <= 9) ovarian response during conventional multiple-dose antagonist stimulation protocols and were co-treated in a subsequent cycle with 5 mg Letrozole from the first day of stimulation until trigger day. A self-paired comparison between gonadotropins-only and gonadotropins-letrozole cycles was performed. Results Twenty-four patients were included. Mean patients' age was 39.83 +/- 4.60 and mean day-3-FSH was 12.77 +/- 4.49 IU/m. Duration of stimulation and total gonadotropins dose were comparable between the two cycle groups. Peak estradiol levels were significantly lower in gonadotropins-letrozole cycles (2786.74 +/- 2118.53 vs 1200.13 +/- 535.98, p < 0.05). Number of retrieved oocytes (3.29 +/- 2.15 vs 6.46 +/- 3.20, p < 0.05), MII-oocytes (2.47 +/- 1.65 vs 5.59 +/- 3.20, p < 0.05), 2PN-embryos (1.78 +/- 1.50, 4.04 +/- 2.74, p < 0.05) and top-quality embryos (0.91 +/- 0.97 vs. 2.35 +/- 1.66, p < 0.05) were significantly higher in the gonadotropins-letrozole cycles. Clinical pregnancy rate in gonadotropins-letrozole cycles was 31.5%. Conclusion Letrozole co-treatment during the entire stimulation course improves ovarian response and IVF outcomes in poor/sub-optimal responders.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available