Pregnancy success in women with poor ovarian response under double ovarian stimulation or two consecutive conventional stimulations: a retrospective study

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

1 Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

2 Assistant Professor of Infertility & IVF, Reproductive Health Research Center, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Al-zahra Hospital, School of Medicine, Guilan University of Medical Sciences, Rasht, Iran.

3 Assistant Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Rooyesh Infertility Center, Faculty of Medicine, Birjand University of Medical Sciences, Birjand, Iran.

4 Associate Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Department of Infertility and IVF, Faculty of Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

5 Associate Professor, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Faculty of Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

6 Assistant Professor, Department of Reproductive Biology, Faculty of Medicine, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.

10.22038/ijogi.2024.78628.6026

Abstract

Introduction: In some cases, infertile patients have poor ovarian response, so it is necessary to obtain the right number of oocytes with proper stimulation. The number of oocytes obtained is directly related to fertility success. This study was conducted with aim to compare two methods of double stimulation and two regular sequential stimulations and their relationship with pregnancy outcomes.
Methods: This prospective cohort study was conducted in Shariati Hospital of Tehran in 2022-2023. A total of 140 women with poor ovarian response based on Bologna criteria who underwent oocyte puncture were selected for in vitro fertilization. Among these, 70 women with double stimulation and 70 women with two consecutive normal stimulations after embryo transfer were compared in terms of clinical pregnancy rate and cumulative live birth rate. T-test or Mann-Whitney test was used to examine quantitative variables and chi-square test was used to examine qualitative variables. Data analysis was done using SPSS statistical software (version 24). P<0.05 was considered significant.
Results: The results showed that although the percentage of clinical pregnancy (p=0.28) and live birth (p=0.5) was higher in the group under double stimulation, however, no significant relationship was observed between them. It was also found that the number of MII oocytes and follicles greater than 14 mm and the number of frozen embryos was higher in the group of double stimulation compared to the other group, which was statistically significant (p<0.05).
Conclusion: The double stimulation compared to regular sequential stimulation had no superiority in pregnancy outcomes, including chemical and clinical pregnancy. However, it can increase the number of MII eggs, follicles larger than 14 mm and the number of frozen embryos.

Keywords

Main Subjects

References

  1. Greil AL, Slauson‐Blevins K, McQuillan J. The experience of infertility: a review of recent literature. Sociology of health & illness 2010; 32(1):140-62.
  2. Hedayat P, Derakhshan M, Kassab Z. A prospective case-control study on the association of intrauterine devices and cervical cancer risk; data from two educational centers. Journal of Preventive Epidemiology 2021; 7(1):e01-.
  3. Kumar N, Singh AK. Trends of male factor infertility, an important cause of infertility: A review of literature. Journal of human reproductive sciences 2015; 8(4):191-6.
  4. Vander Borght M, Wyns C. Fertility and infertility: Definition and epidemiology. Clinical biochemistry 2018; 62:2-10.
  5. Farahbod F, Zarean E, Khanjani S, Moezzi M, Mohammadizade F, Shabanian S. Relationship between placental thickness, grading, and heterogeneity in fetal growth restriction in the third trimester of pregnancy by ultrasonography and pathology tests and their relationship with estimated fetal weight and neonatal outcome. Immunopathol Persa 2023; x(x):e39471.
  6. Harton GL, Munné S, Surrey M, Grifo J, Kaplan B, McCulloh DH, et al. Diminished effect of maternal age on implantation after preimplantation genetic diagnosis with array comparative genomic hybridization. Fertility and sterility 2013; 100(6):1695-703.
  7. Nezamdoust S, Farzaneh F. Comparison of the effect of trigger of ovulation with HCG and HCG plus oxytocin on the biochemical pregnancy. The Iranian Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Infertility 2020; 22(12):19-23.
  8. Nassiri S, Hantoushzadeh S, Eshraghi N, Ghaemi M, Panahi Z. Are Fetal Nuchal Translucency Thickness and Crown-rump Length Associated with Maternal Hematological and Biochemical Profile?. Fertility, Gynecology and Andrology 2023 (In Press).
  9. Tehranineshat B, samghabadi NZ, Shahryarpanah Z, Eydizadeh Z, Jaski R, Ziaadini Z, et al. Prevalence and causes of gynecological surgery cancellations at Shariati Bandar Abbas hospital. Journal of Preventive Epidemiology; 2024.
  10. Polyzos NP, Devroey P. A systematic review of randomized trials for the treatment of poor ovarian responders: is there any light at the end of the tunnel?. Fertility and sterility 2011; 96(5):1058-61.
  11. Teimouri B, Mollashahi S, Paracheh M, Farzaneh F. Comparison of the effect of letrozole alone with letrozole plus n-acetylcysteine on pregnancy rate in patients with polycystic ovarian syndrome: a randomized clinical trial. International Journal of Women's Health and Reproduction Sciences 2021; 9(1):75-9.
  12. Ghanbari Z, Eshraghi N, Ghaemi M, Feizabad E, Zafarbakhsh A. Examining the Morphology of External Genitalia in Iranian Women: A Labiagram-based Study in Iran and its Influence on Patients' Self-Satisfaction. Aesthetic Plastic Surgery 2024: 1-6.
  13. Nasri H. Renal effects of hydatidiform mole and choriocarcinoma. Journal of Renal Endocrinology 2023; 9(1):e25097-.
  14. Kuang Y, Hong Q, Chen Q, Lyu Q, Ai A, Fu Y, et al. Luteal-phase ovarian stimulation is feasible for producing competent oocytes in women undergoing in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection treatment, with optimal pregnancy outcomes in frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles. Fertility and sterility 2014; 101(1):105-11.
  15. Kuang Y, Chen Q, Hong Q, Lyu Q, Ai A, Fu Y, et al. Double stimulations during the follicular and luteal phases of poor responders in IVF/ICSI programmes (Shanghai protocol). Reproductive biomedicine online 2014; 29(6):684-91.
  16. Khanjani S, Farahbod F, Zarean E, Tarrahi MJ, Mohammadi B. Evaluation of the relation between cerebroplacental ratio, umbilical-cerebral ratio, and cerebro-placental-uterine ratio with the occurrence of adverse perinatal outcomes in pregnancies complicated by fetal growth restriction. Immunopathol Persa 2023; x(x):e39503.
  17. Lu BJ, Lin CJ, Lin BZ, Huang L, Chien LT, et al. ART outcomes following ovarian stimulation in the luteal phase: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics 2021; 38(8):1927-38.
  18. Jin B, Niu Z, Xu B, Chen Q, Zhang A. Comparison of clinical outcomes among dual ovarian stimulation, mild stimulation and luteal phase stimulation protocols in women with poor ovarian response. Gynecological Endocrinology 2018; 34(8):694-7.
  19. Li J, Lyu S, Lyu S, Gao M. Pregnancy outcomes in double stimulation versus two consecutive mild stimulations for IVF in poor ovarian responders. Journal of Clinical Medicine 2022; 11(22):6780.
  20. Lin LT, Vitale SG, Chen SN, Wen ZH, Tsai HW, Chern CU, et al. Luteal phase ovarian stimulation may improve oocyte retrieval and oocyte quality in poor ovarian responders undergoing in vitro fertilization: preliminary results from a single-center prospective pilot study. Advances in therapy 2018; 35:847-56.
  21. Wei LH, Ma WH, Tang N, Wei JH. Luteal-phase ovarian stimulation is a feasible method for poor ovarian responders undergoing in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection-embryo transfer treatment compared to a GnRH antagonist protocol: A retrospective study. Taiwanese Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2016; 55(1):50-4.
  22. Zhang W, Wang M, Wang S, Bao H, Qu Q, Zhang N, et al. Luteal phase ovarian stimulation for poor ovarian responders. JBRA assisted reproduction 2018; 22(3):193.
  23. Li Y, Yang W, Chen X, Li L, Zhang Q, Yang D. Comparison between follicular stimulation and luteal stimulation protocols with clomiphene and HMG in women with poor ovarian response. Gynecological Endocrinology 2016; 32(1):74-7.
The Iranian Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Infertility
Volume 27, Issue 4
June 2024
Pages 1-8

Files

Share

How to cite

Statistics