Journal of International Reproductive Health/Family Planning ›› 2022, Vol. 41 ›› Issue (1): 1-5.doi: 10.12280/gjszjk.20210346

• Original Article •     Next Articles

Clinical Study of Different Ovulation Induction Schemes in the Treatment of Patients with Expected Poor Ovarian Response

LI Wan-qing, HONG Ming-yun(), TANG Zhi-xia   

  1. Maternal and Child Health Hospital Affiliated to Anhui Medical University, Hefei 230001, China
  • Received:2021-08-03 Published:2022-01-15 Online:2022-02-17
  • Contact: HONG Ming-yun E-mail:2006mingyun@sina.com

Abstract:

Objective: To compare the clinical outcomes of antagonist, microstimulation and progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) protocols in the patients with expected poor ovarian response (POR). Methods: The expected PORs who underwent in vitro fertilization (IVF)/intra cytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) treatment in Maternal and Child Health Hospital Affiliated to Anhui Medical University from January 2016 to December 2020 were selected and divided into 3 groups: antagonist group (group A, 161 cycles), microstimulation group (group B, 300 cycles) and PPOS group (group C, 153 cycles). The ovulation induction outcomes of the three groups were analyzed. Due to the influence on endometrial receptivity in group C and the few fresh embryo transfer cycles in group A and B, only the clinical outcomes of the frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) cycles (120 cycles in group A, 114 cycles in group B, 65 cycles in group C) were collected. Results: The amount of gonadotrophin (Gn) in group A was higher than that in group B or group C, the number of Gn days was shorter in the group B than group A (both P<0.05). The number of oocytes retrieved in group A was more than group B or group C, and this number in group B was in the middle (P<0.05). The number of mature oocytes (MⅡ) in group A was more than that in group B or group C (P<0.05). The cycle cancellation rate in group C was higher than that in group A or group B (P<0.05). However, there were no significant differences in the number of available embryos, the number of high-quality embryos, fertilization rate, cleavage rate, implantation rate and clinical pregnancy rate of FET among the three groups (all P>0.05). Conclusions: Compared with the antagonist program, the microstimulation program has less Gn amount and shorter time. Compared with the PPOS program, the microstimulation program has a lower cycle cancellation rate. The clinical outcomes of the FET cycle in the three programs were similar. The microstimulation program is more suitable for those patients with expected POR.

Key words: Ovulation induction, Fertilization in vitro, Sperm injections,intracytoplasmic, Poor ovarian response, Minimal stimulation protocol, Antagonist protocol, Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation protocol