4.7 Article

The aromatase inhibitor letrozole increases the concentration of intraovarian androgens and improves in vitro fertilization outcome in low responder patients:: a pilot study

Journal

FERTILITY AND STERILITY
Volume 84, Issue 1, Pages 82-87

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.01.117

Keywords

poor response; IVF; aromatase inhibitors

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To evaluate the impact of aromatase inhibitors as adjuvant treatment in IVF cycles on intraovarian androgens and cycle outcome. Design: Observational, pilot study. Setting: University-affiliated IVF unit. Patient(s): One hundred forty-seven low responder patients with a previous canceled IVF cycle; 71 patients were treated with letrozole 2.5 mg plus a high-dose FSH/hMG-antagonist regimen, and 76 patients were similarly treated but letrozole was not employed. Intervention(s): In vitro fertilization treatment with an antagonist FSH/hMG protocol with or without letrozole was administered during the first 5 days of stimulation; hormones were evaluated in both serum and follicular fluid. Main Outcome Measure(S): Number of oocytes retrieved, fertilization rate, implantation rate, and pregnancy rate; androstenedione, T, E-2, and P values in serum and follicular fluid. Result(s): Letrozole-treated patients showed significantly higher levels of follicular fluid T and androstenedione (80.3 vs. 43.8 pg/mL and 57.9 vs. 37.4 mg/mL, respectively). Similarly, these patients had a higher number of oocytes retrieved (6.1 vs. 4.3) and a higher implantation rate (25% vs. 9.4%) despite similar doses of FSH/hMG (3,627 vs. 3,804 IU). Conclusion(S): Adding 2.5 mg of letrozole to a high-dose FSH/hMG antagonist protocol increases intraovarian androstenedione and T concentration and improves IVF cycle outcome in poor responder patients. (c) 2005 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available