不同超促排卵方案在体外受精-胚胎移植中的临床效果

doi:10.19739/j.cnki.issn1001-9510.2020.06.001

Abstract
Figure/Table
References
Related Citation (1)

Download: PDF (1100 KB) HTML (1 KB)
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract Objective To compare the clinical and laboratory results of three different controlled superovulation protocols in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer(IVF-ET), and from the actual situation of patients, provide a basis for clinicians to choose the best superovulation protocol.Methods Patients′ data were retrospectively analyzed who underwent IVF-ET for 1996 fresh cycles in our reproductive center from January 2016 to August 2019, and were divided into super long program group (471 cycles) and long program group (818 cycles), and antagonist program group (707 cycles) according to different hyperovulation programs. The differences were statistically analyzed in the general situation, clinical medication, timing of egg retrieval, trigger type and laboratory related data of the three groups of patients.Results BMI, bFSH, bLH and bE₂ of the antagonist program group were all higher than those of the other two groups, and compared with those of the long program group, P<0.05, while bT and bAFC in the antagonist program group were higher than those in the super long program group, P<0.05. The number of Gn days in the super long program group was higher than that in the other two groups, P<0.05. PhCGE₂ and hCGE₂ in the antagonist program group were significantly lower than those in the other two groups, P<0.05. HCGAFC in the antagonist program group was less than that in the other two groups, P<0.05. The amount of trigger HCG in the antagonist program group was less than that in the other two groups, P<0.05. The number of eggs in the long program group was higher than that in the super long program group, P<0.05. The number of high quality embryos and 2PN in the long program group was higher than that in the super long program group, P<0.05. HCG trigger type accounted for the highest proportion, and Gn trigger was not used in the super long program. There were many types of H/G double triggers in antagonist program. There was no significant difference intrigger type between the patients in the super long program group and the long program group. Trigger types were compared among patients in three groups of protocols, P<0.05.Conclusion Among the three ovulation induction programs, each has its own indications. According to the existing clinical data, the basic situation of the patient is analyzed to select the unique advantages of each ovulation induction program, the best ovulation induction program and the trigger type, to grasp the proper timing of egg retrieval, to get the right number of eggs as much as possible, and to cultivate a good embryo in order to make the most benefits for the patients.

Key words： in vitro fertilization embryo transfer controlled hyperovulation timing of trigger timing of egg retrieval clinical data laboratory data

Received: 28 June 2020

PACS:

R711.6

	Service

	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	DING Peihui
	WANG Yanlin
	LAO Kaixue

Cite this article:

DING Peihui,WANG Yanlin,LAO Kaixue. Comparison of different superovulation protocols in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer[J]. 滨州医学院学报, 2020, 43(6): 401-405.

URL:

http://manu58.magtech.com.cn/Jwk_bzyxy/EN/10.19739/j.cnki.issn1001-9510.2020.06.001 OR http://manu58.magtech.com.cn/Jwk_bzyxy/EN/Y2020/V43/I6/401

[1] 李元华,唐婷,邓丽,等.音乐放松想象训练对 IVF-ET 取卵患者的治疗效果研究[J].检验医学与临床,2017,14(9):1300-1302.
[2] 李昭凤,王辉,郝明耀,等.隔药灸脐法治疗排卵障碍性不孕症: 随机对照试验[J].中国针灸,2017,37(8):819-823.
[3] ZHANG W,XIE D,ZHANG H,et al.Cumulative live birth rates after the first art cycle using flexible gnrh antagonist protocol vs.standard long gnrh agonist protocol: a retrospective cohort study in women of different ages and various ovarian reserve[J].Front Endocrinol (Lausanne),2020,11(11):287-296.
[4] 徐潇雨,王树玉,张巧利,等.IVF-ET中不同促排卵方案的临床研究[J].中国优生与遗传杂志,2019,27(6):758-760.
[5] 黄晓燕,吕红,吴春香,等.多囊卵巢综合征患者的体质量指数和脂代谢水平对促性腺激素释放激素拮抗剂方案妊娠结局的影响[J].中华生殖与避孕杂志,2018,38(12):969-975.
[6] 王靖,邢琼,王超,等.3种不同促排卵方案在高龄不孕患者IVF/ICSI-ET 中的临床应用分析[J].纪安徽医科大学学报,2018,53(7):1080-1084.
[7] SHRESTHA D.Comparison of different stimulation protocols used in in vitro fertilization: a review[J].Ann Transl Med,2015,3(10):137-143.
[8] 杨菁,冯亭亭,孙伟,等.3种不同超促排卵方案在高龄患者体外受精-胚胎移植中的临床效果分析[J].现代妇产科进展,2016,25(11):830-837.
[9] BAR-HAVA I,MIZRACHI Y,KARFUNKEL-DORON D,et al.Intranasal gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) for luteal-phase support following GnRHa triggering,a novel approach to avoid ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome in high responders[J].FertilSteril,2016,106(2):330-333.
[10] 胡毅娜,丁涛,赵琰,等.两种降调节方案体外受精-胚胎移植出生结局的比较[J].中国妇幼保健,2017,32(4):808-810.
[11] 刘子华,王兴玲,范含笑.两种不同的促排卵方案在辅助生殖技术孕育结局中的疗效分析[J].实用妇科内分泌电子杂志,2019,6(9):54-57.
[12] 黄晓阳,陈莉.IVF不同促排卵方案临床结局比较[J].系统医学,2019,4(24):112-114.
[13] 王靖,邢琼,王超,等.3种不同促排卵方案在高龄不孕患者IVF/ICSI-ET中的临床应用分析[J].安徽医科大学学报,2018,53(7):96-100.
[14] 张燕,包俊华,姚海蓉,等.拮抗剂方案在卵巢储备功能低下患者中的临床应用及费效比[J].中华生殖与避孕杂志,2018,38(3):228-231.
[15] WERTHEIMER A,DANIELI-GRUBER S,HOCHBERG A,et al.,The association between treatment parameters on the day of gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist initiation during a flexible protocol and oocyte maturation rate[J].Reprod Biol,2020,20(2):127-131.
[16] 薛冰,朱爱珍.拮抗剂方案与黄体期长效长方案在卵巢正常反应人群中应用效果分析[J].名医,2020(5):276-277.
[17] DING N,LIU X,JIAN Q,et al.Dual trigger of final oocyte maturation with a combination of GnRH agonist and hCG versus a hCG alone trigger in GnRH antagonist cycle for in vitro fertilization:A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis[J].Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol,2017,218(2017):92-98.