Implantation rates subsequent to the transfer of embryos produced at different phases during double stimulation of poor ovarian responders
Qiong Zhang A , Xiaoyue M. Guo B and Yanping Li A C
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations
A Center for Reproductive Medicine, Xiang-Ya Hospital, Central South University, 87th Xiangya Road, Changsha, Hunan, 410000, China.
B Yale University School of Medicine, New Haven, CT, USA.
C Corresponding author. Email: lyp7798@126.com
Reproduction, Fertility and Development 29(6) 1178-1183 https://doi.org/10.1071/RD16020
Submitted: 28 July 2015 Accepted: 17 March 2016 Published: 11 May 2016
Abstract
To compare the implantation capacity of embryos obtained at different phases of double stimulation (DS) of poor ovarian responders, 153 DS cycles were analysed retrospectively. As part of the DS protocol, antral follicles were stimulated continuously during both the follicular and luteal phases. Fresh embryos obtained in both phases were cryopreserved and transferred in the next artificial cycle. The mean number of oocytes retrieved, MII oocytes and zygotes with two pronuclei was significantly higher for collections during luteal-phase stimulation. Furthermore, the dose of exogenous gonadotropin administered was higher during the luteal phase. The rate of clinical pregnancy and embryo implantation increased progressively from pure follicular phase embryos to mixed embryos to pure luteal phase embryos. Embryos produced during the luteal phase resulted in higher implantation rates.
Additional keywords: luteal phase ovarian stimulation.
References
Alpha Scientists in Reproductive Medicine and ESHRE Special Interest Group of Embryology (2011). The Istanbul Consensus Workshop on Embryo Assessment: proceedings of an expert meeting. Hum. Reprod. 26, 1270–1283.| The Istanbul Consensus Workshop on Embryo Assessment: proceedings of an expert meeting.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 21502182PubMed |
Baerwald, A. R., Adams, G. P., and Pierson, R. A. (2003). Characterization of ovarian follicular wave dynamics in women. Biol. Reprod. 69, 1023–1031.
| Characterization of ovarian follicular wave dynamics in women.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD3sXmvVeiurs%3D&md5=9535bd29363de8b0d8823f0868594c3bCAS | 12748128PubMed |
Baerwald, A. R., Adams, G. P., and Pierson, R. A. (2012). Ovarian antral folliculogenesis during the human menstrual cycle: a review. Hum. Reprod. Update 18, 73–91.
| Ovarian antral folliculogenesis during the human menstrual cycle: a review.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 22068695PubMed |
Bedoschi, G. M., de Albuquerque, F. O., Ferriani, R. A., and Navarro, P. A. (2010). Ovarian stimulation during the luteal phase for fertility preservation of cancer patients: case reports and review of the literature. J. Assist. Reprod. Genet. 27, 491–494.
| Ovarian stimulation during the luteal phase for fertility preservation of cancer patients: case reports and review of the literature.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 20455017PubMed |
Ferraretti, A. P., La Marca, A., Fauser, B. C., Tarlatzis, B., Nargund, G., Gianaroli, L., , and ESHRE working group on Poor Ovarian Response Definition
| ESHRE consensus on the definition of ‘poor response’ to ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: the Bologna criteria.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:STN:280:DC%2BC3MjislertA%3D%3D&md5=9e620d89606d365d56ed2eebc7673618CAS | 21505041PubMed |
Fischer, R. (2007). Understanding the role of LH: myths and facts. Reprod. Biomed. Online 15, 468–477.
| Understanding the role of LH: myths and facts.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD2sXht1CntL3K&md5=6cfe6a91c70408f595add8eddf748f76CAS | 17908413PubMed |
Juan, B. (2009). The role of FSH and LH in ovulation induction: current concepts. In ‘Textbook of Assisted Reproductive Technologies’. (Eds D. K. Gardner, A. Weissman, C. M. Howles, Z. Shoham.) pp. 489–517. (Informa UK: London.)
Karsch, F. J., Weick, R. F., Hotchkiss, J., Dierschke, D. J., and Knobil, E. (1973). An analysis of the negative feedback control of gonadotrophin secreation utilizing chronic implantation of ovarian steroid in ovariectomized rhesus monkeys. Endocrinology 93, 478–486.
| An analysis of the negative feedback control of gonadotrophin secreation utilizing chronic implantation of ovarian steroid in ovariectomized rhesus monkeys.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DyaE3sXltlCltL8%3D&md5=4c9d191182c0c4928dc29f9e1c29c02dCAS | 4198095PubMed |
Kuang, Y., Hong, Q., Chen, Q., Lyu, Q., Ai, A., Fu, Y., and Shoham, Z. (2014a). 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. Fertil. Steril. 101, 105–111.
| 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.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC3sXhslahsLrE&md5=a99ea85b30e833ae0d24e457c480606aCAS | 24161646PubMed |
Kuang, Y., Chen, Q., Hong, Q., Lyu, Q., Ai, A., Fu, Y., and Shoham, Z. (2014b). Double stimulations during the follicular and luteal phases of poor responders in IVF/ICSI programmes (Shanghai protocol). Reprod. Biomed. Online 29, 684–691.
| Double stimulations during the follicular and luteal phases of poor responders in IVF/ICSI programmes (Shanghai protocol).Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 25444501PubMed |
Kumar, P., and Sait, S. F. (2011). Luteinizing hormone and its dilemma in ovulation induction. J. Hum. Reprod. Sci. 4, 2–7.
| Luteinizing hormone and its dilemma in ovulation induction.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC3MXhsFOmtrrF&md5=ed226c4dec087b6dba5c226a79b89facCAS | 21772731PubMed |
Li, Y., Yang, W., Chen, X., Li, L., Zhang, Q., and Yang, D. (2016). Comparison between follicular stimulation and luteal stimulation protocols with clomiphene and HMG in women with poor ovarian response. Gynecol. Endocrinol. 32, 74–77.
| Comparison between follicular stimulation and luteal stimulation protocols with clomiphene and HMG in women with poor ovarian response.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC28XkslKis7w%3D&md5=6206958414498dea5771a210adf994ecCAS | 26370530PubMed |
Messinis, I. E. (2006). Ovarian feedback, mechanism of action and possible clinical implications. Hum. Reprod. Update 12, 557–571.
| Ovarian feedback, mechanism of action and possible clinical implications.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD28Xotl2lsrk%3D&md5=7b8a761fe42b7bc584bafcfb8e7e60bdCAS | 16672246PubMed |
O’Dea, L., O’Brien, F., Currie, K., and Hemsey, G. (2008). Follicular development induced by recombinant luteinizing hormone (LH) and follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) in anovulatory women with LH and FSH deficiency: evidence of a threshold effect. Curr. Med. Res. Opin. 24, 2785–2793.
| Follicular development induced by recombinant luteinizing hormone (LH) and follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) in anovulatory women with LH and FSH deficiency: evidence of a threshold effect.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD1cXhsVKmt7zJ&md5=ca310a5fd16d6903eaec37a8c04a0d1eCAS | 18727841PubMed |
Richard, E. J., and Kristin, H. L. (2014). ‘Human Reproductive Biology.’ 4th edn. (Elsevier: London.)
Teramoto, S., and Kato, O. (2007). Minimal ovarian stimulation with clomiphene citrate: a large-scale retrospective study. Reprod. Biomed. Online 15, 134–148.
| Minimal ovarian stimulation with clomiphene citrate: a large-scale retrospective study.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD2sXhtVWitb%2FN&md5=1097bb548a6217a08b3e792e34dab1f7CAS | 17697488PubMed |
Tesarik, J., and Mendoza, C. (2002). Effects of exogenous LH administration during ovarian stimulation of pituitary down-regulated young oocyte donors on oocyte yield and developmental competence. Hum. Reprod. 17, 3129–3137.
| Effects of exogenous LH administration during ovarian stimulation of pituitary down-regulated young oocyte donors on oocyte yield and developmental competence.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BD3sXltFaguw%3D%3D&md5=3af406a49606c676f2397d9b6104428eCAS | 12456612PubMed |
Xu, B., and Li, Y. (2013). Flexible ovarian stimulation in a poor responder: a case report and literature review. Reprod. Biomed. Online 26, 378–383.
| Flexible ovarian stimulation in a poor responder: a case report and literature review.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DC%2BC3sXhslChsb7L&md5=c33ca6f3be850007a14ad86e52296ab0CAS | 23497915PubMed |
Yamaji, T., Dierschke, D. J., Bhattacharya, A. N., and Knobil, E. (1972). The negative feedback control by estradiol and progesterone of LH secretion in the ovariectomized rhesus monkey. Endocrinology 90, 771–777.
| The negative feedback control by estradiol and progesterone of LH secretion in the ovariectomized rhesus monkey.Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 1:CAS:528:DyaE38XksVemtLo%3D&md5=2d54a42b0ce3c63d130b2e94a3e03ce3CAS | 4621570PubMed |
Zhang, J. (2015). Luteal phase ovarian stimulation following oocyte retrieval: is it helpful for poor responders? Reprod. Biol. Endocrinol. 13, 76–79.
| Luteal phase ovarian stimulation following oocyte retrieval: is it helpful for poor responders?Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar | 26209449PubMed |
