4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Women with regular menstrual cycles and a poor response to ovarian hyperstimulation for in vitro fertilization exhibit follicular phase characteristics suggestive of ovarian aging

期刊

FERTILITY AND STERILITY
卷 78, 期 2, 页码 291-297

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0015-0282(02)03227-2

关键词

ovarian aging; IVF; poor response; follicular phase; follicles; FSH; progesterone; inhibin; ovary; menstrual cycle

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To investigate whether follicular phase characteristics associated with ovarian aging can be observed in women of normal reproductive age, who had previously shown a poor response to ovarian hyperstimulation for IVF. Design: Observational, prospective study. Setting: Tertiary fertility center. Patient(s): Eleven regularly cycling, ovulatory women, aged 29-40 years who previously presented with fewer than four dominant follicles after ovarian hyperstimulation for IVF. Intervention(s): Frequent serum hormone assessments and transvaginal ultrasound during the follicular phase of a spontaneous, unstimulated cycle. Main Outcome Measure(s): Duration of the follicular phase; serum LH, FSH, E-2, P, inhibin A, and inhibin B levels; and number of antral follicles observed by ultrasound. Results were compared with the cycle characteristics of a reference population of 38 healthy normo-ovulatory women aged 20-36 years (as published elsewhere). Result(s): Poor responders had significantly fewer antral follicles than controls. Median FSH concentrations were significantly higher compared with controls, but the majority had FSH levels within the normal range. Follicular phase P levels were significantly higher in poor responders. Duration of the follicular phase, E-2, and inhibin A and inhibin B serum levels did not differ between poor responders and controls. Conclusion(s): Normo-ovulatory regularly cycling women with a previous poor response to ovarian hyperstimulation for IVF show follicular phase characteristics suggestive of ovarian aging.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据