A prospective, randomized controlled trial comparing the efficacy of recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone in three different in vitro fertilization protocols

Citation
A. Ravhon et al., A prospective, randomized controlled trial comparing the efficacy of recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone in three different in vitro fertilization protocols, FERT STERIL, 73(5), 2000, pp. 908-912
Citations number
28
Categorie Soggetti
Reproductive Medicine","da verificare
Journal title
FERTILITY AND STERILITY
ISSN journal
00150282 → ACNP
Volume
73
Issue
5
Year of publication
2000
Pages
908 - 912
Database
ISI
SICI code
0015-0282(200005)73:5<908:APRCTC>2.0.ZU;2-4
Abstract
Objective: To compare the following IVF protocols: a short protocol and lon g protocols starting on day 2 or day 21. All protocols used recombinant FSH (rFSH) for ovarian stimulation. Design: Prospective, randomized study. Setting: An assisted reproduction unit at a university center. Patient(s): Patients undergoing IVF (n = 150) were treated according to one of the three treatment protocols allocated by a random method. Intervention(s): All patients used buserelin acetate and rFSH. Patients beg an the long protocol on day 2 (group 1) or day 21 (group 2) of the cycle. P atients in group 3 began the short protocol on day 2 of the cycle. Main Outcome Measure(s): Ovarian response, implantation rates, and pregnanc y rates (PRs). Result(s): Patients treated with the short protocol (group 3) were stimulat ed in a shorter time, required less rFSH, and achieved higher E-2 levels. T he numbers of follicles, oocytes, and embryos were similar in all three gro ups. The implantation rates were similar in groups 1 and 2 (11.8% and 13.3% , respectively), and both were higher than in group 3 (4.1%). Clinical PRs per oocytes retrieved were 19.6%, 18.6% and 8.3% in groups 1, 2, and 3, res pectively. Conclusion(s): The implantation rate was significantly higher with the long protocols than with the short protocol, with a tendency for a higher PR as well. (Fertil Steril(R) 2000;73:908 -12. (C) 2000 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine).