Premium
Combined GnRH‐agonist and HMG therapy in patients with stimulation failure
Author(s) -
Loutradis D.,
Kallianidis K.,
Siskos K.,
Bletsa R.,
Creatsas G.,
Michalas S.,
Aravantinos D.
Publication year - 1991
Publication title -
international journal of gynecology and obstetrics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.895
H-Index - 97
eISSN - 1879-3479
pISSN - 0020-7292
DOI - 10.1016/0020-7292(91)90486-o
Subject(s) - medicine , hmg coa reductase , agonist , stimulation , in vitro fertilisation , human fertilization , embryo transfer , pregnancy rate , endocrinology , oocyte , menotropins , pregnancy , andrology , embryo , ovulation , ovulation induction , receptor , biology , hormone , anatomy , biochemistry , genetics , reductase , enzyme , microbiology and biotechnology
This study deals with the combined therapy of GnRH‐agonist (GnRH‐a) and HMG for stimulation in 15 patients who failed two prior in vitro fertilization attempts. Fifty‐three patients who received HMG without GnRH‐agonist suppresion served as controls. Comparing the HMG group with GnRH‐a/HMG cycles, the cancellation rate dropped from 35.5% to 13.2%. Oocyte recovery was similar in both groups, as were the fertilization rates, 88.4% in GnRH‐a and 82% in HMG cycles, respectively. The number of embryos available for transfer was virtually identical in both groups (3.7 vs. 3.6). Embryo cleavage speed was higher in GnRH‐a than in HMG regimens. The E 2 rise was smooth in the GnRH‐a group compared to the sharp rise observed in the HMG group. The pregnancy rate per transfer was 30.5% in the GnRH‐a group versus 20.5% in the HMG group. GnRH‐a seems to offer a clear improvement to a number of stimulation failures.