Vol. 5 (10) pp. 1544-1550 DOI: 10.21474/IJAR01/5670

EFFECT OF DIFFERENT CONTROLLED OVARIAN HYPER-STIMULATION PROTOCOLS ON ENDOMETRIAL RECEPTIVITY PARAMETERS OF ICSI PROGRAMS.

  • High institute of infertility diagnosis and ARTs / Al-Nahrain University.
  • Medical college/ Al-Nahrain University.
19 Downloads 94 Views
Crossref

Abstract

Background: Infertility is defined by demographers as childlessness in a population of women at a reproductive age, currently, female fertility normally reaching the peak at age of 24 years and declines after the age of 30-32. Age, overweight, smoking, abnormal pituitary- ovarian hormones all are considered as risk factors of infertility. IVF technique was to overcome this condition by using patients? oocytes and sperms. A good number of high quality oocytes are required for maximizing the success rates with IVF cycles, since success rates correspond to the number of retrieved oocytes. Gonadotropic releasing hormones used for suppression of pituitary hormones with exogenous Gonadotropic hormones administration can achieve multifollicular stimulation in different protocols. Objective: Comparing the effect of different controlled ovarian hyperstimulation protocols on the endometrial receptivity markers. Methods: A total of eighty patients undergoing IVF/ICSI cycle were evaluated. One out of three types of controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) protocols had been chosen for each patient according to her age, history and hormonal assay. At day of embryo transfer blood sample was taken to measure the level of VEGF, also Doppler ultrasonography to measure the resistance index (RI), pulsatility index (PI), systolic velocity/diastolic velocity (VS/Vd) was done. Results: There were no significant difference between the three types of ovarian stimulation protocols, still the picture drawn suggests that GnRH antagonists are slightly less efficacious than GnRH agonists in long protocols. Conclusion: Different types of controlled ovarian hyperstimulation protocols have no significant effects on endometrial receptivity parameters.

Keywords

Article Analytics

References

  1. Nordqvist, Ch. Infertility: Causes, Diagnosis, Risks, Treatments. Medical News Today, 21 January 2016.
  2. Adam H Balen,?Anthony J Rutherford. Management of infertility. British Medical Journal, 2007 Sep 22; 335(7620): 608?11.
  3. Copperman, Alan B; Benadiva, Claudio. "Optimal usage of the GnRH antagonists: a review of the literature".?Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology,2013;?11?(1): 20.
  4. Orvieto,? Patrizio P.GnRH agonist versus GnRH antagonist in ovarian stimulation: an ongoing debateReproductive BioMedicine Online, ?January 2013;26(1): 4?8
  5. R.,K?Jayakrishan,?GarrutiG,Ilaria?Totaro,?PanzarinoM.,?GiorginoF?and,Luigi?E?Selvaggi GnRH agonist versus GnRH antagonist in?in vitro?fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF/ET).Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology2012:10:26
  6. Al-Obaidy, M. T. COMPARISON OF THE EFFECTIVENESS OF LONG AGONIST OVER THE ANTAGONIST CONTROLLED OVARIAN HYPER STIMULATION PROTOCOLS IN IN VITRO World Journal of Pharmaceutical Research, 2016; 5(9):1785-96.
  7. Magon N "Gonadotropin releasing hormone agonists: Expanding vistas".?Indian Journal of Endocrinology and Metabolism, October 2011;?15?(4): 261?7.
  8. Shanbhag S, Aucott L, Bhattacharya S, Hamilton MA, McTavish AR. Intervensions for ?poor responders? to controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) in in vitro fertilization (IVF). Cochrane Database Systemic Review 2007;(1):CD004379.
  9. ASRM/SART registry?.Assisted reproductive technology in the United States: 1998 results generated from the American Society for Reproductive Medicine/Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Registry. Fertility Sterility, 2002; 77:18-31.
  10. Ubaldi FM, Rienzi L, Ferrero S, Baroni E, Sapienza F, Cobellis L, et al. Management of poor responders in IVF. Reprod Biomed Online 2005;10(2):235?46.
  11. Pellicer A, Ardiles G, Neuspiller F, Remohi J, Simon C, Bonilla-Musoles F. Evaluation of the ovarian reserve in young low responders with normal basal FSH levels using 3-D ultrasound. Fertil Steril 1998;70:671?5
  12. Mahutte NG, Arici A. Poor responders: does the protocol make a difference? Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2002;14:275?81.
  13. Beckers NGM, Macklon NS, Eijkemans MJC, Fauser BCJM. Women with regular menstrual cycles and a poor response to ovarian hyperstimulation for in vitro fertilization exhibit follicular phase characteristics suggestive of ovarian aging. Fertil Steril 2002;78:291?7.
  14. De Boer EJ, Tonkelaar I, te Velde ER, Burger, Klip H, van Leeuwen FE. A low number of retrieved oocytes at in vitro fertilization treatment is predictive of early menopause. Fertil Steril 2002;77:978?85.
  15. Nikolaou D, Lavery S, Turner C, Margara R, Trew G. Is there a link between an extremely poor response to ovarian hyperstimulation and an early ovarian failure? Hum Reprod 2002;17:1106?11.
  16. Sunkara S, Coomarasamy A., Faris R. Braude P., Khalaf Y. Long gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist versus short agonist versus antagonist regimens in poor responders undergoing in?vitro fertilization: a randomized controlled trial. Fertility and Sterility, January 2014; 101(1):147-53.
  17. Shrestha,?Xiaolin La,and?Huai L. Feng. Comparison of different stimulation protocols used in?in vitrofertilization: Annals of Translational Medicine. 2015 Jun; 3(10): 137.
  18. El-Toukhy T., Coomarasamy A., Khairy M., Sunkara M.. The relationship between endometrial thickness and outcome of medicated frozen embryo replacement cycles. Fertility and Sterility,?April 2008; 89 (4): 832-9.

How to Cite This Article

Wafaa S. Rahmatullah, Manal Taha Al-Obaidi, Wasan I. AL-Saadi and Mohammad Oda Selman. (2017); EFFECT OF DIFFERENT CONTROLLED OVARIAN HYPER-STIMULATION PROTOCOLS ON ENDOMETRIAL RECEPTIVITY PARAMETERS OF ICSI PROGRAMS., Int. J. of Adv. Res., 5 (10), 1544-1550, ISSN 2320-5407. DOI: https://doi.org/10.21474/IJAR01/5670

Corresponding Author

Wafaa S. Rahmatullah
High institute of infertility diagnosis and ARTs / Al-Nahrain University