4.4 Article

Is there a detrimental effect of higher gonadotrophin dose on clinical pregnancy rate in normo-responders undergoing ART with long protocol?

Journal

ARCHIVES OF GYNECOLOGY AND OBSTETRICS
Volume 287, Issue 5, Pages 1039-1044

Publisher

SPRINGER HEIDELBERG
DOI: 10.1007/s00404-012-2673-z

Keywords

Gonadotrophin dose; ART; Clinical pregnancy rate

Ask authors/readers for more resources

In recent years, it has become evident that ovarian stimulation, although a central component of in vitro fertilization (IVF), may itself has detrimental effects on oogenesis, embryo quality, endometrial receptivity, and perhaps also perinatal outcomes. To evaluate the effect of higher gonadotrophin dose on clinical pregnancy rate in normo-responder ICSI cycles with long protocol. A retrospective study was planned in the Department of Reproductive Endocrinology of Zekai Tahir Burak Women's Health Education and Research Hospital. 362 normo-responders undergoing ICSI cycles with long protocol were included in the study. Group 1 (n = 260): Total gonadotrophin dose < 2198 IU and Group 2 (n = 102): Total gonadotrophin dose > 2198 IU. Laboratory IVF outcome, clinical pregnancy rate were evaluated. There was no statistically significant difference between peak estradiol levels, endometrial thickness, fertilization rates among the Group 1 versus Group 2 (p > 0.05). But there was a statistically significant difference in age, baseline FSH, oocyte number, 2PN, and clinical pregnancy among the Group 1 versus Group 2. Clinical pregnancy rate were significantly higher in Group 1 compared with Group 2 (p < 0.001). Lower gonadotrophin dose, 2PN was an independent positive predictor of clinical pregnancy (OR 2.65 for gonadotrophin dose, OR 1.1 for 2PN) Higher total gonadotrophin dose adversely affect clinical pregnancy in normo-responder patients undergoing ICSI cycles with long protocol.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available