OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the short or long protocol for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation works better in older patients undergoing IVF. DESIGN: Controlled, randomized study. SETTING: A single private IVF center. PATIENT(S): Two hundred twenty infertile women aged > or = 40 years undergoing IVF. INTERVENTION(S): At their first IVF cycle, the women were randomized into two study groups according to a computer-generated number sequence: 110 patients were treated with a long protocol, and the other 110 were treated with a short protocol for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Days of stimulation, E2 level at the day of hCG administration, amount of FSH administered, number of oocytes collected, number of embryos obtained, pregnancy rate, implantation rate. RESULT(S): Patients treated with a long protocol showed a significantly higher number of oocytes retrieved, a higher number of embryos obtained, and a higher pregnancy rate, both for cycle and transfer, compared with the short-protocol patients. The other parameters evaluated did not show any statistically significant differences. CONCLUSION(S): Our study showed that the long protocol performed better than the short protocol in older women. Our findings demonstrated that flare-up in older women might be detrimental.

Short versus long gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogue suppression protocols for superovulation in patients > or = 40 years old undergoing intracytoplasmic sperm injection / Sbracia M; Farina A; Poverini R; Morgia F; Schimberni M; Aragona C.. - In: FERTILITY AND STERILITY. - ISSN 0015-0282. - STAMPA. - 84:(2005), pp. 644-648. [10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.02.046]

Short versus long gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogue suppression protocols for superovulation in patients > or = 40 years old undergoing intracytoplasmic sperm injection.

FARINA, ANTONIO;
2005

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether the short or long protocol for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation works better in older patients undergoing IVF. DESIGN: Controlled, randomized study. SETTING: A single private IVF center. PATIENT(S): Two hundred twenty infertile women aged > or = 40 years undergoing IVF. INTERVENTION(S): At their first IVF cycle, the women were randomized into two study groups according to a computer-generated number sequence: 110 patients were treated with a long protocol, and the other 110 were treated with a short protocol for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Days of stimulation, E2 level at the day of hCG administration, amount of FSH administered, number of oocytes collected, number of embryos obtained, pregnancy rate, implantation rate. RESULT(S): Patients treated with a long protocol showed a significantly higher number of oocytes retrieved, a higher number of embryos obtained, and a higher pregnancy rate, both for cycle and transfer, compared with the short-protocol patients. The other parameters evaluated did not show any statistically significant differences. CONCLUSION(S): Our study showed that the long protocol performed better than the short protocol in older women. Our findings demonstrated that flare-up in older women might be detrimental.
2005
Short versus long gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogue suppression protocols for superovulation in patients > or = 40 years old undergoing intracytoplasmic sperm injection / Sbracia M; Farina A; Poverini R; Morgia F; Schimberni M; Aragona C.. - In: FERTILITY AND STERILITY. - ISSN 0015-0282. - STAMPA. - 84:(2005), pp. 644-648. [10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.02.046]
Sbracia M; Farina A; Poverini R; Morgia F; Schimberni M; Aragona C.
File in questo prodotto:
Eventuali allegati, non sono esposti

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11585/7526
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus 19
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? 19
social impact