Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-5d59c44645-jqctd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-03-03T07:32:22.163Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Section 2 - Stimulation for IVF

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  04 January 2019

Gabor Kovacs
Affiliation:
Monash University, Victoria
Anthony Rutherford
Affiliation:
University of Leeds
David K. Gardner
Affiliation:
University of Melbourne
Get access
Type
Chapter
Information
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

References

Trounson, AO, Leeton, JF, Wood, C, Webb, J, Kovacs, G. The investigation of idiopathic infertility by in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 1980 November;34(5): 431–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Jones, HW, Jones, GS, Andrews, MC et al. The program for in vitro fertilization at Norfolk. Fertil Steril. 1982 July;38(1):14–21.sGoogle Scholar
Foulot, H, Ranoux, C, Dubuisson, JB et al. In vitro fertilization without ovarian stimulation: a simplified protocol applied in 80 cycles. Fertil Steril. 1989 October;52(4): 617–21.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paulson, RJ, Sauer, MV, Francis, MM, Macaso, TM, Lobo, RA. In vitro fertilization in unstimulated cycles: the University of Southern California experience. Fertil Steril. 1992 February;57(2): 290–3.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pelinck, MJ, Hoek, A, Simons, AHM, Heineman, MJ. Efficacy of natural cycle IVF: a review of the literature. Hum Reprod Update. 2002;8(2): 129–39.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Meldrum, DR, Rivier, J, Garzo, G et al. Successful pregnancies with unstimulated cycle oocyte donation using an antagonist of gonadotropin-releasing hormone. Fertil Steril. 1994;61: 556–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Paulson, RJ, Sauer, MV, Lobo, RA. Addition of a gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist and exogenous gonadotropins to unstimulated in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles: Physiologic observations and preliminary experience. J Assist Reprod Genet. 1994;11:2832.Google Scholar
Filicori, M, Cognigni, GE, Gameberini, E et al. Efficacy of low-dose human chorionic gonadotropin alone to complete controlled ovarian stimulation. Fertil Steril. 2005;84:394401.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Martins, WP, Vieira, AD, Figueiredo, JB, Nastri, CO. FSH replaced by low-dose hCG in the late follicular phase versus continued FSH for assisted reproductive techniques. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;3:CD010042.Google Scholar
Paulson, RJ, Chung, K, Quaas, AM et al. Low dose HCG alone can complete follicle maturity: successful application to modified natural cycle IVF. Fertil Steril. 2016 May;105(5): 1228–31.Google Scholar
Teramoto, S, Osada, H, Sato, Y, Shozu, M. Nondominant small follicles are a promising source of mature oocytes in modified natural cycle in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer. Fertil Steril. 2016 July;106(1): 113–18.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tang-Pedersen, M, Westergaard, LG, Erb, K, Mikkelsen, AL. Combination of IVF and IVM in naturally cycling women. Repro Biomed Online 2012 January;24(1):4753.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thornton, MH, Francisco, MM, Paulson, RJ. Immature oocyte retrieval: lessons from unstimulated IVF cycles. Fertil Steril. 1998 October;70(4): 647–50.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gordon, JD, DiMattina, M, Reh, A et al. Utilization and success rates of unstimulated in vitro fertilization in the United States: an analysis of the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology database. Fertil Steril. 2013 August;100(2): 392–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaulov, T, Velez, MP, Buzaglo, K, Phillips, SJ, Kadoch, IJ. Outcomes of 1503 cycles of modified natural cycle in vitro fertilization: a single-institution experience. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2015;32: 1043–8.Google Scholar
Morgia, F, Sbracia, M, Schimberni, M et al. A controlled trial of natural cycle versus microdose gonadotropin-releasing hormone analog flare cycles in poor responders undergoing in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 2004 June;81(6): 1542–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kim, CH, Kim, SR, Cheon, YP et al. Minimal stimulation using gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist and recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone versus GnRH antagonist multiple-dose protocol in low responders undergoing in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Fertil Steril. 2009 December;92(6): 2082–4.Google Scholar
Shimberni, M, Morgia, F, Colabianchi, J et al. Natural-cycle in vitro fertilization in poor responder patients: a survey of 500 consecutive cycles. Fertil Steril. 2009 October;92(4):12971301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mak, W, Kondapalli, LA, Celia, G et al. Natural cycle IVF reduces the risk of low birthweight infants compared with conventional stimulated IVF. Hum Reprod 2016;31(4):789–94.Google Scholar
Nargund, G, Fauser, BC, Macklon, NS et al. Rotterdam ISMAAR consensus group on terminology for ovarian stimulation for IVF. Human Reprod. 2007;22: 2801–4.Google Scholar
Heijnen, EM, Eijkemans, MJ, De Klerk, C et al. A mild treatment strategy for in-vitro fertilization: a randomized non-inferiority trial. Lancet 2007 March;369(9563): 743–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Youssef, MA, van Wely, M, Al-Inany, H et al. van der Veen F. A mild ovarian stimulation strategy in women with poor ovarian reserve undergoing IVF: a multicenter randomized non-inferiority trial. Hum Reprod. 2017 January;32(1): 112–18.Google ScholarPubMed
Drakopoulos, P, Blockeel, C, Stoop, D et al. Conventional ovarian stimulation and single embryo transfer for IVF/ICSI. How many oocytes do we need to maximize cumulative live birth rates after utilization of all fresh and frozen embryos? Human Reprod. 31(2): 370–6.Google Scholar
Paulson, RJ, Sauer, MV, Lobo RA: Embryo implantation after human in vitro fertilization: Importance of endometrial receptivity. Fertil Steril. 1990;53:870.Google Scholar
Sunkara, SK, Rittenberg, V, Raine-Fenning, N et al. Association between the number of eggs an live birth in IVF treatment: an analysis of 400,135 treatment cycles. Hum Reprod. 2011;26(7): 1768–74.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Steward, RG, Lan, L, Shah, AA et al. Oocyte number is a predictor for ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome and live birth: an analysis of 256,381 in vitro fertilization cycles. Fertil Steril. 2014 April;101(4): 967–73.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Baker, VL, Brown, MB, Luke, B, Smith, GW, Ireland, JJ. Gonadotropin dose is negatively correlated with live birth rate: analysis of more than 650,000 assisted reproductive technology cycles. Fertil Steril. 2015 November;104(5): 1145–52.Google Scholar
Baart, EB, Martini, E, Eijkemans, MJ et al. Milder ovarian stimulation for in-vitro fertilization reduces aneuploidy in the human preimplantation embryo: a randomized control trial. Hum Reprod. 2007 April;22(4): 980–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Labarta, E, Bosch, E, Alamá, P et al. Moderate ovarian stimulation does not increase the incidence of human embryo chromosomal abnormalities in in vitro fertilization cycles. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2012 October;97(10):E1987–94.Google Scholar

References

Knobil, E. The neuroendocrine control of the menstrual cycle. Recent Prog Horm Res. 1980;30:136.Google Scholar
Stanger, YD, Yovich, JL Reduced in vitro fertilization of human oocytes from patients with raised basal luteinizing hormone levels during the follicular phase. B J Obstet Gynecol. 1985;92:385–93.Google Scholar
Frattarelli, JL, Hillensjö, T, Broekmans, FJ et al. Clinical impact of LH rises prior to and during ganirelix treatment started on day 5 or on day 6 of ovarian stimulation. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2013;11:90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hughes, EG, Fedorkow, DM, Daya, S et al. The routine use of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists prior to in vitro fertilization and gamete intrafallopian transfer: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Fertil Steril. 1992;58:888–96.Google Scholar
Schally, AV, Nair, RMG, Redding, TW et al. Isolation of the luteinizing hormone and follicle stimulating hormone-releasing hormone from porcine hypothalami. J Biol Chem. 1971;246:7230–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Feldberg, D, Ashkenazi, J, Dicker, D et al. Ovarian cysts formation: a complication of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist therapy. Fertil Steril. 1989;51:42–5.Google Scholar
Biljan, MM, Lapensée, L, Mahutte, N et al. Effects of ovarian cysts detected on the 7th day of gonadotropin-releasing hormone analog administration on the outcome of IVF treatment. Fertil Steril. 2000;74:941–5.Google Scholar
Reissmann, T, Felberbaum, R, Diedrich, K et al. Development and applications of luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone antagonists in the treatment of infertility: an overview. Hum Reprod. 1995;10:1974–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Duijkers, IJM, Klipping, C, Willemsen, WNP et al. Single and multiple dose pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonist Cetrorelix in healthy female volunteers. Hum Reprod. 1998;13:2392–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oberye, JJ, Mannaerts, BM, Kleijn, HJ, Timmer, CJ Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics of ganirelix (Antagon/Orgalutran). Part I. Absolute bioavailability of 0.25 mg of ganirelix after a single subcutaneous injection in healthy female volunteers. Fertil Steril. 1999;72:1001–5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Oberye, JJ, Mannaerts, BM, Huisman, JA, Timmer, CJ Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics of ganirelix (Antagon/Orgalutran). Part II. Dose-proportionality and gonadotropin suppression after multiple doses of ganirelix in healthy female volunteers. Fertil Steril 1999;72:1006–12.Google Scholar
Griesinger, G, Diedrich, K, Devroey, P, Kolibianakis, EM GnRH agonist for triggering final oocyte maturation in the GnRH antagonist ovarian hyperstimulation protocol: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2006;12:159–68.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sommer, L, Zanger, K, Dyong, T et al. Seven-day administration of the gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist Cetrorelix in normal cycling women. Eur J Endocrinol. 1994;131:280–5.Google Scholar
Duijkers, IJM, Klipping, C, Willemsen, WNP et al. Single and multiple dose pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of the gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonist Cetrorelix in healthy female volunteers. Hum Reprod. 1998;13:2392–8.Google Scholar
Erb, K, Klipping, C, Duijkers, I et al. Pharmacodynamic effects and plasma pharmacokinetics of single doses of cetrorelix acetate in healthy premenopausal women. Fertil Steril. 2001;75:316–23.Google Scholar
Griesinger, G, Felberbaum, RE, Schultze-Mosgau, A, Diedrich, K. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonists for assisted reproductive techniques: are there clinical differences between agents? Drugs. 2004;64(6):563–75.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nagaraja, NV, Pechstein, B, Erb, K et al. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic modeling of cetrorelix, an LH-RH antagonist, after subcutaneous administration in healthy premenopausal women. Clin Pharmacol Ther. 2000;68: 617–25.Google Scholar
Frattarelli, JL, Hillensjö, T, Broekmans, FJ et al. Clinical impact of LH rises prior to and during ganirelix treatment started on day 5 or on day 6 of ovarian stimulation. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2013 September 12;11:90.Google Scholar
Griesinger, G, Dawson, A, Schultze-Mosgau, A, Finas, D, Diedrich K and Felberbaum R. Assessment of luteinizing hormone levels in the gonadotropin-releasing hormone-antagonist protocol. Fertility Sterility 2006 March;85(3):791–3.Google Scholar
Griesinger, G, Shapiro, DB, Kolibianakis, EM, Witjes, H, Mannaerts, BM No association between endogenous LH and pregnancy in a GnRH antagonist protocol: part II, recombinant FSH. Reprod Biomed Online. 2011 October;23(4):457–65.Google Scholar
Kolibianakis, EM, Kalogeropoulou, L, Griesinger, G et al. Among patients treated with FSH and GnRH analogues for in vitro fertilization, is the addition of recombinant LH associated with the probability of live birth? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2007 September–October;13(5):445–52.Google Scholar
Xiong, Y, Bu, Z, Dai, W et al. Recombinant luteinizing hormone supplementation in women undergoing in vitro fertilization/ intracytoplasmic sperm injection with gonadotropin releasing hormone antagonist protocol: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2014 November 24;12:109.Google Scholar
Griesinger, Georg, Finas, D, Alisch, A et al. Diedrich K and Felberbaum R. FSH time-concentration profiles before and after the administration of 0.25 mg cetrorelix in the GnRH-antagonist multiple dose protocol for ovarian hyperstimulation. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 2004;21:279–82.Google Scholar
Al-Inany, H, Aboulghar, MA, Mansour, RT, Serour, GI Optimizing GnRH antagonist administration: meta-analysis of fixed versus flexible protocol. Reprod Biomed Online. 2005;10:567–70.Google Scholar
Al-Inany, H, Aboulghar, M. GnRH antagonist in assisted reproduction: a Cochrane review. Hum Reprod. 2002;17:874–85.Google Scholar
Kolibianakis, EM, Griesinger, G. GnRH antagonists in ART In:Human Assisted Reproductive Technology: Future Trends in Laboratory and Clinical Practice. Edited by Gardner, David K, Rizk, Botros R. M. B. and Falcone, Tommaso. Cambridge University Press 2011, ISBN 978–1-107–00112-1.Google Scholar
Kolibianakis, EM, Collins, J, Tarlatzis, B et al. Among patients treated for IVF with gonadotrophins and GnRH-analogues, is the probability of live birth dependent on the type of analogue used? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Human Reproduction Update 2006 November–December;12:6517–1.Google Scholar
Al-Inany, HG, Youssef, MA, Aboulghar, M et al. Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonists for assisted reproductive technology. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011 May 11;(5):CD001750.Google Scholar
Toftager, M, Bogstad, J, Bryndorf, T et al. Risk of severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome in GnRH antagonist versus GnRH agonist protocol: RCT including 1050 first IVF/ICSI cycles. Hum Reprod. 2016;31:1253–64.Google Scholar
Toftager, M, Bogstad, J, Løssl, K et al. Cumulative live birth rates after one ART cycle including all subsequent frozen-thaw cycles in 1050 women: secondary outcome of an RCT comparing GnRH-antagonist and GnRH-agonist protocols. Hum Reprod. 2017;32: 5566–7.Google Scholar
Tarlatzis, BC, Griesinger, G, Leader, A et al. Comparative incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome following ovarian stimulation with corifollitropin alfa or recombinant FSH. Reprod Biomed Online 2012;24:4101–9.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Griesinger, G, Verweij, PJM, Gates, D, Devroey, P, Gordon, K, Stegmann, BJ et al. Prediction of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome in patients treated with corifollitropin alfa or rFSH in a GnRH antagonist protocol. PLoS ONE 2016;11(3):e0149615. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0149615.Google Scholar
Griesinger, G., von Otte, S., Schroer, A. et al. Elective cryopreservation of all pronuclear oocytes after GnRH-agonist triggering of final oocyte maturation in OHSS risk patients: a prospective, observational proof-of-concept study. Human Reproduction 2007;22:1348–52 Russian Excerpted Edition: Human Reproduction Update 2007;2:55–9.Google Scholar
Griesinger, G, Berndt, H, Schultz, L, Depenbusch, M, Schultze-Mosgau, A. Cumulative live birth rates after GnRH-agonist triggering of final oocyte maturation in patients at risk of OHSS: A prospective, clinical cohort study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2010;149:190–4.Google Scholar
Al-Inany, HG, Youssef, MA, Ayeleke, RO et al. Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonists for assisted reproductive technology. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016 April 29;4:CD001750.Google Scholar
Griesinger, G, Diedrich, K, Tarlatzis, B, Kolibianakis, EM GnRH-antagonists in ovarian stimulation for IVF in patients with [1] poor response to gonadotrophins, [2] polycystic ovary syndrome, and [3] risk of ovarian hyperstimulation: a meta-analysis. Reproductive Biomedicine Online 2006;13:6283–8.Google Scholar
Pu, D, Wu, J, Liu, J. Comparisons of GnRH antagonist versus GnRH agonist protocol in poor ovarian responders undergoing IVF. Hum Reprod. 2011;26:2742–9.Google Scholar
Fauser, BC, Mannaerts, BM, Devroey, P et al. Advances in recombinant DNA technology: corifollitropin alfa, a hybrid molecule with sustained follicle-stimulating activity and reduced injection frequency. Hum Reprod Update. 2009;15:3092–1.Google Scholar
Griesinger, G, Boostanfar, R, Gordon, K et al. Corifollitropin alfa versus recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone: an individual patient data meta-analysis. Reprod Biomed Online. 2016 April 20. p ii: S1472–6483(16)30068–2. doi:10.1016/j.rbmo.2016.04.005CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nyboe Andersen, A, Nelson, SM, Fauser, BC et al. ESTHER-1 study group. Individualized versus conventional ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: a multicenter, randomized, controlled, assessor-blinded, phase 3 noninferiority trial. Fertil Steril.2017;107: 3879–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

References

Edwards, RG. The history of assisted human conception with especial reference to endocrinology. Exp Clin Endocrinol Diabetes. 1996;104:183204.Google Scholar
Steptoe, PC, Edwards, RG. Laparoscopic recovery of preovulatory human oocytes after priming of ovaries with gonadotrophins. Lancet. 1970; 1(7649):683–9.Google ScholarPubMed
Steptoe, PC, Edwards, RG. Reimplantation of a human embryo with subsequent tubal pregnancy. Lancet. 1976;1(7965):880–2.Google Scholar
Edwards, RG, Steptoe, PC, Purdy, JM. Establishing full-term human pregnancies using cleaving embryos grown in vitro. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1980;87:737–56.Google Scholar
Jones, HW Jr, Jones, GS, Andrews, MC et al. The program for in vitro fertilization at Norfolk. Fertil Steril. 1982 Jul;38(1):1421.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Trounson, AO, Leeton, JF, Wood, C, Webb, J, Wood, J. Pregnancies in humans by fertilization in vitro and embryo transfer in the controlled ovulatory cycle. Science 1981;212:681–2.Google Scholar
Fishel, SB, Edwards, RG, Purdy, JM et al. Implantation, abortion, and birth after in vitro fertilization using the natural menstrual cycle or follicular stimulation with clomiphene citrate and human menopausal gonadotropin. J In Vitro Fert Embryo Transf. 1985;2:123–31.Google Scholar
Lunenfeld, B. Historical perspectives in gonadotrophin therapy. Human Reproduction Update 2004;10:453–67.Google Scholar
Howles, CM. Recombinant gonadotrophins in reproductive medicine: the gold standard of today. Reprod Biomed Online. 2006;12:11–3.Google Scholar
Lispi, M, Bassett, R, Crisci, C et al. Comparative assessment of the consistency and quality of a highly purified FSH extracted from human urine (urofollitropin) and a recombinant human FSH (follitropin alpha). Reprod Biomed Online. 2006;13:179–93.Google Scholar
Boostanfar, R, Mannaerts, B, Pang, S et al. A comparison of live birth rates and cumulative ongoing pregnancy rates between Europe and North America after ovarian stimulation with corifollitropin alfa or recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone. Fertil Steril. 2012;97:1351–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wide, L, Bakos, O. More basic forms of both human follicle-stimulating hormone and luteinizing hormone in serum at midcycle compared with the follicular or luteal phase. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1993;76:885–9.Google Scholar
Wide, L, Naessén, T, Sundström-Poromaa, I, Eriksson, K. Sulfonation and sialylation of gonadotropins in women during the menstrual cycle, after menopause, and with polycystic ovarian syndrome and in men. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2007;92:4410–7.Google Scholar
Wide, L, Naessén, T, Eriksson, K. Effects of 17beta-oestradiol and norethisterone acetate on sulfonation and sialylation of gonadotrophins in post-menopausal women. Ups J Med Sci. 2010;115:97106.Google Scholar
Horsman, G, Talbot, JA, McLoughlin, JD, Lambert, A, Robertson, WR. A biological, immunological and physico-chemical comparison of the current clinical batches of the recombinant FSH preparations Gonal-F and Puregon. Hum Reprod. 2000;15:1898–902.Google Scholar
Howles, CM. Genetic engineering of human FSH (Gonal-F). Hum Reprod Update. 1996;2:172–91.Google Scholar
Loumaye, E, Martineau, I, Piazzi, A et al. Clinical assessment of human gonadotrophins produced by recombinant DNA technology. Hum Reprod. 1996;11 Suppl 1:95107.Google Scholar
Driebergen, R, Baer, G. Quantification of follicle stimulating hormone (follitropin alfa): is in vivo bioassay still relevant in the recombinant age? Curr Med Res Opin. 2003;19:41–6.Google Scholar
Fauser, BC, Mannaerts, BM, Devroey, P et al. Advances in recombinant DNA technology: corifollitropin alfa, a hybrid molecule with sustained follicle-stimulating activity and reduced injection frequency. Hum Reprod Update. 2009;15:309–21.Google Scholar
Scholtes, MC, Schnittert, B, van Hoogstraten, D et al. A comparison of 3-day and daily follicle-stimulating hormone injections on stimulation days 1–6 in women undergoing controlled ovarian hyperstimulation. Fertil Steril. 2004; 81:9961001.Google Scholar
Orvieto, R, Seifer, DB. Biosimilar FSH preparations: are they identical twins or just siblings? Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2016; 14:32.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schiestl, M. A biosimilar industry view on the implementation of the WHO guidelines on evaluating similar biotherapeutic products. Biologicals. 2011;39:297–9.Google Scholar
Rettenbacher, M, Andersen, AN, Garcia-Velasco, JA et al. A multi-centre phase 3 study comparing efficacy and safety of Bemfola(®) versus Gonal-f(®) in women undergoing ovarian stimulation for IVF. Reprod Biomed Online. 2015;30:504–13.Google Scholar
Olsson, H, Sandstrom, R, Grundemar, L. Different pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone (rFSH) derived from a human cell line compared with rFSH from a non-human cell line. J Clin Pharmacol 2014;54:12991307.Google Scholar
Arce, JC, Andersen, AN, Fernández-Sánchez, M et al. Ovarian response to recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone: a randomized, antimüllerian hormone-stratified, dose-response trial in women undergoing in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Fertil Steril. 2014;102:1633–40.Google Scholar
Nyboe Andersen, A, Nelson, SM, Fauser, BC et al. ESTHER-1 study group. Individualized versus conventional ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: a multicenter, randomized, controlled, assessor-blinded, phase 3 noninferiority trial. Fertil Steril. 2017;107:387–96.Google Scholar
Abd-Elaziz, K, Duijkers, I, Stöckl, L et al. A new fully human recombinant FSH (follitropin epsilon): two phase I randomized placebo and comparator-controlled pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic trials. Hum Reprod. 2017;7:19.Google Scholar
Baird, DT. A model for follicular selection and ovulation: lessons from superovulation. J Steroid Biochem. 1987;27:1523.Google Scholar
Sunkara, SK, Rittenberg, V, Raine-Fenning, N et al. Association between the number of eggs and live birth in IVF treatment: an analysis of 400 135 treatment cycles. Hum Reprod. 2011;26:1768–74.Google Scholar
Bosch, E, Labarta, E, Crespo, J et al. Circulating progesterone levels and ongoing pregnancy rates in controlled ovarian stimulation cycles for in vitro fertilization: analysis of over 4000 cycles. Hum Reprod. 2010;25:2092–100.Google Scholar
Porter, RN, Smith, W, Craft, IL, Abdulwahid, NA, Jacobs, HS. Induction of ovulation for in-vitro fertilisation using buserelin and gonadotropins. Lancet. 1984;2(8414):1284–5.Google Scholar
Fleming, R, Adam, AH, Barlow, DH et al. A new systematic treatment for infertile women with abnormal hormone profiles. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1982;89:80–3.Google Scholar
Howles, CM, Macnamee, MC, Edwards, RG, Goswamy, R, Steptoe, PC. Effect of high tonic levels of luteinising hormone on outcome of in-vitro fertilisation. Lancet. 1986;2(8505):521–2.Google Scholar
Kol, S, Muchtar, M. Recombinant gonadotrophin-based, ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome-free stimulation of the high responder: suggested protocol for further research. Reprod Biomed Online. 2005;10:575–7.Google Scholar
Humaidan, P, Bredkjaer, HE, Bungum, L, Bungum, M, Grøndahl, ML, Westergaard, L,Andersen, CY. GnRH agonist (buserelin) or hCG for ovulation induction in GnRH antagonist IVF/ICSI cycles: a prospective randomized study. Hum Reprod. 2005;20:1213–20.Google Scholar
Devroey, P, Polyzos, NP, Blockeel, C. An OHSS-Free Clinic by segmentation of IVF treatment. Hum Reprod. 2011;26:2593–7.Google Scholar
Broekmans, FJ, de Ziegler, D, Howles, CM et al. The antral follicle count: practical recommendations for better standardization. Fertil Steril. 2010;94:1044–51.Google Scholar
Nelson, SM, Yates, RW, Lyall, H et al. Anti-Müllerian hormone-based approach to controlled ovarian stimulation for assisted conception. Hum Reprod. 2009;24:867–75.Google Scholar
Cobo, A, Garrido, N, Pellicer, A, Remohí, J. Six years’ experience in ovum donation using vitrified oocytes: report of cumulative outcomes, impact of storage time, and development of a predictive model for oocyte survival rate. Fertil Steril. 2015;104:1426–34.Google Scholar
Fauser, BC, Diedrich, K, Devroey, P. Predictors of ovarian response: progress towards individualized treatment in ovulation induction and ovarian stimulation. Hum Reprod Update 2008;14:114.Google Scholar
Aboulghar, MA, Mansour, RT. Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome: classifications and critical analysis of preventive measures. Hum Reprod Update 2003;9:275–89.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Humaidan, P, Engmann, L, Benadiva, C. Luteal phase supplementation after gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist trigger in fresh embryo transfer: the American versus European approaches. Fertil Steril. 2015;103:879–85.Google Scholar
Dosouto, C, Haahr, T, Humaidan, P. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) trigger – State of the art. Reprod Biol. 2017;17:18.Google Scholar

References

Baird, DT, Factors regulating the growth of the preovulatory follicle in the sheep and human, J Reprod Fertil. 1983, 69, 343–52.Google Scholar
Wallace, WH, Kelsey, TW, Human ovarian reserve from conception to the menopause, PLoS One, 2010, 8772.Google Scholar
Fauser, BC, Van Heusden, AM, Manipulation of human ovarian function: physiological concepts and clinical consequences, Endocr Rev. 1997, 18, 71106.Google Scholar
Nelson, SM, Yates, RW, Fleming, R, Serum anti-Müllerian hormone and FSH: prediction of live birth and extremes of response in stimulated cycles–implications for individualization of therapy, Hum Reprod. 2007, 22, 2414–21.Google Scholar
de Ziegler, D, Gayet, V, Aubriot, FX et al., Use of oral contraceptives in women with endometriosis before assisted reproduction treatment improves outcomes, Fertil Steril. 2010, 94, 2796–9.Google Scholar
Porchet, HC, Le Cotonnec, JY, Loumaye, E, Clinical pharmacology of recombinant human follicle stimulating hormone (FSH). III. Pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic modeling after repeated subcutaneous administration, Fertil Steril. 1994, 61, 687–95.Google Scholar
Olivennes, F, Trew, G, Borini, A et al., Randomized, controlled, open-label, non-inferiority study of the CONSORT algorithm for individualized dosing of follitropin alfa, Reprod Biomed Online. 2015, 30, 248–57.Google Scholar
Jayaprakasan, K, Hopkisson, J, Campbell, B et al., A randomised controlled trial of 300 versus 225 IU recombinant FSH for ovarian stimulation in predicted normal responders by antral follicle count, BJOG. 2010, 117, 853–62.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schimberni, M, Ciardo, F, Schimberni, M et al., Short gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist versus flexible antagonist versus clomiphene citrate regimens in poor responders undergoing in vitro fertilization: a randomized controlled trial, Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2016, 20, 4354–61.Google Scholar
Wikland, M, Bergh, C, Borg, K et al., A prospective, randomized comparison of two starting doses of recombinant FSH in combination with cetrorelix in women undergoing ovarian stimulation for IVF/ICSI, Hum Reprod. 2001, 16, 1676–81.Google Scholar
La Marca, A, Grisendi, V, Giulini, S et al., Live birth rates in the different combinations of the Bologna criteria poor ovarian responders: a validation study, J Assist Reprod Genet. 2015, 32, 931–7.Google Scholar
Nyboe Andersen, A, Nelson, SM, Fauser, BC et al., ESTHER-1 study group., Individualized versus conventional ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: a multicenter, randomized, controlled, assessor-blinded, phase 3 noninferiority trial, Fertil Steril, 2016, [Epub ahead of print], PMID:27912901.Google Scholar
Olsson, H, Sandström, R, Grundemar, L, Different pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic properties of recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone (rFSH) derived from a human cell line compared with rFSH from a non-human cell line, J Clin Pharmacol. 2014, 54, 1299–307.Google Scholar
Sunkara, SK, 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, Fertil Steril. 2014, 101, 147–53.Google Scholar
Fleming, R, Yates, R, Coutts, JRT, Presented to the Endocrine Society annual meeting, 1994.Google Scholar
Fleming, R, Ambrose, P, Mitchell, P, Adam, C, Gaudoin, M, Manuscript in preparation.Google Scholar
Blockeel, C, Sterrenburg, MD, Broekmans, FJ et al., Follicular phase endocrine characteristics during ovarian stimulation and GnRH antagonist cotreatment for IVF: RCT comparing recFSH initiated on cycle day 2 or 5, J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2011, 96, 1122–8.Google Scholar
Cédrin-Durnerin, I, Bständig, B, Parneix, I et al., Effects of oral contraceptive, synthetic progestogen or natural estrogen pre-treatments on the hormonal profile and the antral follicle cohort before GnRH antagonist protocol, Hum Reprod. 2007, 22, 109–16.Google Scholar
Griesinger, G, Kolibianakis, EM, Venetis, C, Diedrich, K, Tarlatzis, B, Oral contraceptive pretreatment significantly reduces ongoing pregnancy likelihood in gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist cycles: an updated meta-analysis, Fertil Steril. 2010, 94, 2382–4.Google Scholar
Sobotka, V, Streda, R, Mardesic, T, Tosner, J, Heracek, J, Steroids pretreatment in assisted reproduction cycles, J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol. 2014, 139, 114–21.Google Scholar
Griesinger, G, Venetis, CA, Tarlatzis, B, Kolibianakis, EM, To pill or not to pill in GnRH-antagonist cycles: the answer is in the data already!, Reprod Biomed Online. 2015, 31, 42588.Google Scholar

References

Yovich, JL. A clinician’s personal view of assisted reproductive technology over 35 years. Reprod Biol 2011; 11: 3142.Google Scholar
Malhotra, J. (Ed). Pathfinders; Extraordinary doctors, extraordinary achievements; An Aspire initiative. Pugmarks Mediaa Allahabad, Uttar Pradesh, India 2016; pp84.Google Scholar
Anand Kumar, TC. Architect of India’s first test tube baby: Dr. Subhas Mukherjee (16 Jan 1931 to 19 Jul 1981). Current Science 1997; 72: 526531.Google Scholar
Wikland, MD, Nilsson, L, Hanson, R, Hamberger, L, Jenson, PO. Collection of human oocytes by the use of sonography. Fertil Steril 1983; 39: 603608.Google Scholar
Seppälä, M, Edwards, RG (eds). In vitro fertilization and Embryo Transfer. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1985; 442: p 619. New York.Google Scholar
Brown, S. ESHRE –the first 21 years. ESHRE publication 2005: p 273.Google Scholar
Schally, AV, Kastin, AJ, Arimura, A. Hypothalamic follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) and luteinizing hormone (LH)-regulating hormone: structure, physiology, and clinical studies. Fertil Steril 1971; 22: 703721.Google Scholar
Burgus, R, Butcher, M, Ling, N et al. Molecular structure of the hypothalamic factor (LRF) of ovine origin monitoring the secretion of pituitary gonadotropic hormone of luteinization hormone (LH). C R Acad Sci Hebd Seances Acad Sci D 1971; 273: 16111613. [Articlein French]Google Scholar
Tomaževič, T, Ban-Frankež, H, Virant-Klun, I et al. Septate, subseptate and arcuate uterus decrease pregnancy and live birth rates in IVF/ICSI. Reprod Biomed Online 2010; 21; 700705.Google Scholar
Van Keppel, M, Yovich, JL. Nurturing the best interests of the future child. Annual Meeting of Fert Soc Aust, Sydney, September 2013 (For submission).Google Scholar
Yovich, JL, Alsbjerg, B, Hinchliffe, P, Keane, KN. PIVET rFSH dosing algorithms for individualised controlled ovarian stimulation enables optimised pregnancy productivity rates and avoidance of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. Drug Design, Development & Therapy 2016;10; 25612573.Google Scholar
Nelson, SM. Biomarkers of ovarian response: current and future applications. Fertil Steril 2013;99:963969.Google Scholar
Fisch, JD, Keskintepe, L, Sher, G. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist/antagonist conversion with estrogen priming in low responders with prior in vitro fertilization failure. Fertil Steril 2008;89:342347.Google Scholar
Yovich, J, Grudzinskas, G. The management of infertility; a manual of gamete handling procedures. Heinemann Medical Books, Oxford UK 1990; see p. 21–37.Google Scholar
Craft, I, Shelton, K, Yovich, JL, Smith, D. Ovum retention in the human. Fertil Steril 1980;34:537541.Google Scholar
Bodri, D, Kawachiya, S, Brucker, MD et al. Cumulative success rates following mild IVF in unselected infertile patients: a 3-year, single-centre cohort study. Reprod Biomed Online 2014;28:572581.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pouwer, AW, Farquar, C, Kremer, JA. Long-acting FSH versus daily FSH for women undergoing assisted reproduction. 2012 Cochrane Database Syst Rev Jun 13;(6):CD009577. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD009577.pub2Google Scholar
Yovich, JL, Keane, KN, Borude, G, Dhaliwal, SS, Hinchliffe, PM Finding a place for Corifollitropin within the PIVET FSH Dosing Algorithms. 2017 Reprod Biomed Online; in pressGoogle Scholar
Kuang, Y, Chen, Q, Hong, Q et al. Double stimulations during the follicular and luteal phases of poor responders in IVF/ICSI programmes (Shanghai protocol). Reprod Biomed Online 2014; 6: 684691.Google Scholar
Yovich, JL, Conceicao, JL, Stanger, JD, Hinchliffe, PM, Keane, KN Mid-luteal serum progesterone concentrations govern implantation rates for frozen embryo transfers conducted under hormone replacement. Reprod BioMed Online 2015; 31, 180191.Google Scholar
Bühler, KF, Fischer, R. Recombinant human LH supplementation versus supplementation with urinary hCG-based LH activity during controlled ovarian stimulation in the long GnRH-agonist protocol: a matched case-control study. Gynecol Endocrinol 2012; 28: 345–350.Google Scholar
Lower, A, Shenton, P, O’Shea, F, Yovich, JL. The value of serum levels of oestradiol, progesterone and beta-human chorionic gonadotrophin in the prediction of early pregnancy losses. Hum Reprod 1992; 7: 711717.Google Scholar
Yovich, JL, Stanger, JD, Yovich, JM, Tuvik, AI. Hormonal profiles in the follicular phase, luteal phase and first trimester of pregnancies arising from in-vitro fertilization. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1985; 92: 374384.Google Scholar
Yovich, JL, McColm, SC, Turner, SR, Matson, PL. Heterotopic pregnancy from in-vitro fertilisation. J Vitro Fert Embryo Transfer 1985; 2: 146150.Google Scholar
Barnhart, K, van Mello, NM, Bourne, T et al. Pregnancy of unknown location: A consensus statement of nomenclature, definitions and outcome. Fertil Steril 2010;95:857866.Google Scholar

References

The Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. Fertility and Sterility 2008:9(3); S188S193.Google Scholar
Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists (RCOG) The Management of Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome Green-top Guideline No. 5 September 2006.Google Scholar
Institute of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists, Royal College of Physicians of Ireland, Directorate of Strategy and Clinical Programmes and Health Service Executive. Clinical Practice Guideline, Ovarian Hyperstimulation Diagnosis and Management 2012.Google Scholar
Joint Society of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists of Canada-Canadian Fertility and Andrology Society Clinical Practice Guidelines Committee. Shmorgun, D, Claman, P, Gysler, M et al. The diagnosis and management of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome: No. 268, November 2011. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2012;116:268273.Google Scholar
Boothroyd, C, Karia, S, Andreadis, N et al. and The Australasian CREI Consensus Expert Panel on Trial evidence (ACCEPT) group, Consensus statement on prevention and detection of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. 2015; 5:523534. doi:10.1111/ajo.12406Google Scholar
Kwik, M, Karia, S, Boothroyd, C), RANZCOG CREI consensus statement on treatment of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 2015;55:413419. doi:10.1111/ajo.12389Google Scholar
Mathur, RS, Tan, BK British fertility society policy and practice committee: Prevention of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. Human Fertility 2014:17(4);257268.Google Scholar
Lee, TS, Liu, CH, Huang, CC et al. Serum AMH and estradiol levels as predictors of OHSS in ART cycles. Hum Reprod 2008:23(1);160167.Google Scholar
Luke, B, Brown, MB, Morbeck, DE et al. Factors associated with OHSS and its effect on ART treatment and outcome. Fertil Steril 2010:94(4);13991404.Google Scholar
Al-Inany, HG, Youssef, MA, Aboulghar, M et al. Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonists for assisted reproductive technology. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 5, Art. No.:CD001750. Doi:10.1002/14651858.CD001750.pub3.Google Scholar
Tang, T, Glanville, J, Orsi, N et al. The use of metformin for women with PCOS undergoing IVF treatment. Human Reprod 2006:21(26);14161425.Google Scholar
Mathur, R, Kailasam, C, Jenkins, J. Review of the evidence base strategies to prevent ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. Hum Fertil 2007;10:7585.Google Scholar
Youssef, MA1,Van der, Veen F, Al-Inany, HG et al. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist versus HCG for oocyte triggering in antagonist-assisted reproductive technology. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014 October 31;(10):CD008046. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD008046.pub4.Google Scholar
El-Khayat, W, Elsadek, M. Calcium infusion for the prevention of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome: a double-blind randomized controlled trial. Fertil Steril 2015:103(1);101105.Google Scholar
Banker, M, Garcia-Velasco, JA Revisting ovarian hyper stimulation syndrome: towards OHSS free clinic. J Hum Reprod Sci. 2015 January–March;8(1):1317.Google Scholar

References

Steptoe, PC, Edwards RG. Birth after re-implantation of a human embryo. Lancet 1978; 2: 366.Google Scholar
Steptoe, PC, Webster, J. Laparoscopy for oocyte recovery. Ann NY Acad Sci 1985;442: 178–81.Google Scholar
Lenz, S, Lauritsen, JK. Ultrasonically guided percutaneous aspiration of human follicles under local anesthesia: a new method for collecting oocytes for in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 1982;38: 673–7.Google Scholar
Royal Society of Medicine Symposium, 1985. Mrs Vinay Sharma – personal communication.Google Scholar
Parsons, J, Booker, M, Goswamy, R et al. Campbell S: Oocyte retrieval for in-vitro fertilisation by ultrasonically guided needle aspiration via the urethra. Lancet 1:1076, 1985.Google Scholar
Dellenbach, P, Nisand, I, Moreau, L et al. Transvaginal sonographically controlled follicle puncture for oocyte retrieval. Fertil Steril. 1985; 44: 656662.Google Scholar
Feichtinger, W. and Kemeter, P. Transvaginal sector scan sonography for needle guided transvaginal follicle aspiration and other applications in gynecologic routine and research. Fertil. Steril. 1986; 45, 722725.Google Scholar
Feichtinger, W. Follicle aspiration with interactive three-dimensional digital imaging (Voluson): a step toward real-time puncturing under three-dimensional ultrasound control. Fertil Steril. 1998; 70 (2): 374377.Google Scholar
Rose, B I. Follicle flushing for oocyte retrieval: Targeted analysis for patients with few follicles. IVF Lite 2014; 1: 7580.Google Scholar
Lewin, A, Laufer, N, Rabinowitz, R, Schenker, J. Ultrasound guided oocyte recovery for in vitro fertilization: an improved method. J In Vitro Fert Embryo Transfer. 1986;3: 370–3.Google Scholar
Aziz, N, Biljan, MM, Taylor, CT, Manasse, PR, Kingsland, CR. Effect of aspirating needle caliber on outcome of in-vitro fertilization. Hum Reprod. 1993;8: 1098–100.Google Scholar
Wikipedia. Needle gauge comparison chart. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Needle_gauge_comparison_chart, accessed April 25, 2014.Google Scholar
Wikland, M, Blad, S, Bungum, L et al. A randomized controlled study comparing pain experience between a newly designed needle with a thin tip and a standard needle for oocyte aspiration. Hum Reprod. 2011;26: 1377–83.Google Scholar
Horne, R, Bishop, CJ, Reeves, G, Wood, C, Kovacs, GT. Aspiration of oocytes for in-vitro fertilization. Hum Reprod Update. 1996;2:7785.Google Scholar
Lowe, B, Osborn, JC, Fothergill, DJ, Lieberman, BA. Factors associated with accidental fractures of the zona pellucida and multipronuclear human oocytes following in-vitro fertilization. Hum Reprod. 1988;3:901–4.Google Scholar
Sunkara, SK, Rittenberg, V, Raine-Fenning, N et al. Association between the number of eggs and live birth in IVF treatment: An analysis of 400 135 treatment cycles. Hum Reprod 2011;26: 1768–74.Google Scholar
Elhussein, E, Balen, AH, Tan, SL. A prospective-study comparing the outcome of oocytes retrieved in the aspirate with those retrieved in the flush during transvaginal ultrasound directed oocyte recovery for in vitro fertilization. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1992;99:841844.Google Scholar
Waterstone, JJ, Parsons, JH. A prospective-study to investigate the value of flushing follicles during transvaginal ultrasound-directed follicle aspiration. Fertil Steril 1992;57:221223.Google Scholar
Bagtharia, S, Haloob, ARK. Is there a benefit from routine follicular flushing for oocyte retrieval? J Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 2005; 25 (4): 374376.Google Scholar
Kingsland, CR, Taylor, CT, Aziz, N, Bickerton, N. Is follicular flushing necessary for oocyte retrieval? A randomized trial. Human Reproduction 1991; 6 (3): 382383.Google Scholar
Levens, ED, Whitcomb, BW, Payson, MD, Larsen, FW. Ovarian follicular flushing among low-responding patients undergoing assisted reproductive technology. Fertil Steril. 2009;91:13811384.Google Scholar
Mendez Lozano, DH, Brum Scheffer, J, Frydman, N et al. Optimal reproductive competence of oocytes retrieved through follicular flushing in minimal stimulation IVF. Reprod Biomed Online 2008;16: 119–23.Google Scholar
Mok-Lin, E, Brauer, AA, Schattman, G, Zaninovic, N, Rosenwaks, Z, Spandorfer S Follicular flushing and in vitro fertilization outcomes in the poorest responders: a randomized controlled trial. Human Reproduction 2013; 28 (11): 29902995.Google Scholar
Malhotra, N, Dolkar, D, Mahey, R, Singh, N. To flush or not to flush: a randomized controlled trial comparing follicular flushing and direct aspiration at oocyte retrieval in poor responders undergoing IVF. Fertil & Steril. 2017; 108 (3): 237238.Google Scholar
Levy, G, Hill, MJ, Ramirez, CI et al. The use of follicle flushing during oocyte retrieval in assisted reproductive technologies: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Human Reproduction 2012; 27 (8): 23732379.Google Scholar
Wongtra-ngan, S, Vutyavanich, T, Brown, J. Follicular flushing during oocyte retrieval in assisted reproductive techniques. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2010, Issue 9. Art. No.: CD004634Google Scholar
Sun, XF, Wang, WH, Keefe, DL. Overheating is detrimental to meiotic spindles within in vitro matured human oocytes. Zygote 2004; 12(1): 6570.Google Scholar
Wang, WH, Meng, L, Hackett, R, Odenbourg, R, Keefe, DL. Limited recovery of meiotic spindles in living human oocytes after cooling-rewarming observed using polarized light microscopy. Human Reproduction 2001; 16 (11), 23742378.Google Scholar
Almeida, P., & Bolton, V. The effect of temperature fluctuations on the cytoskeletal organisation and chromosomal constitution of the human oocyte. Zygote, 1995; 3(4), 357365.Google Scholar
Pickering, SJ, Braude, PR, Johnson, MH, Cant, A, Currie, J, Transient cooling to room temperature can cause irreversible disruption of the meiotic spindle in the human oocyte. Fertil and Steril. 1990; 54 (1): 102108.Google Scholar
Redding, GP, Bronlund, JE, Hart, AL. The effects of IVF aspiration on the temperature, dissolved oxygen levels, and pH of follicular fluid. J Assist Reprod Genet 2006; 23: 3740.Google Scholar
Hyslop, L, Prathalingam, N, Nowak, L, Fenwick, J, Harbottle, S et al. (2012) A Novel Isolator-Based System Promotes Viability of Human Embryos during Laboratory Processing. PLOS ONE 7(2): e 31010.Google Scholar
Kwan, I, Bhattacharya, S, Knox, F, McNeil, A. Pain relief for women undergoing oocyte retrieval for assisted reproduction. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2013; 1: CD004829.Google Scholar
Cerne, A, Bergh, C, Borg, K et al. Pre-ovarian block versus paracervical block for occyte retrieval. Human Reproduction 2006; 21 (11): 29162921.Google Scholar
Gejervall, AL, Stener-Victorin, E, Möller, A et al. Electro-acupuncture versus conventional analgesia: a comparison of pain levels during oocyte aspiration and patients’ experiences of well-being after surgery. Hum Reprod 2005; 20: 728–35.Google Scholar
Royal College of Anaesthetists. Guidelines on the Provision of Anaesthetic Services (GPAS), Chapter 19, Guidance on the Provision of Sedation Services 2016.Google Scholar
Yasmin, E, Dresner, M, Balen, A. Sedation and anaesthesia for transvaginal oocyte collection: An evaluation of practice in the UK. Hum Reprod 2004; 19: 2942–5.Google Scholar
Ditkoff, EC, Plumb, J, Selick, A, Sauer, MV. Anesthesia practices in the United States common to in vitro fertilisation (IVF) centers. J Assist Reprod Genet. 1997; 14 (3): 145147.Google Scholar
Sheahan, CG, Mathews, DM. Monitoring and delivery of sedation. British Journal of Anaesthesia 2014; 113 (2): 3747.Google Scholar
Janssenswillen, C, Christiaens, F, Camu, F and Steirteghem, A (1997) The effect of propofol on parthenogenetic activation, in vitro fertilisation and early development of mouse oocytes. Fertil Steril 67,769774.Google Scholar
Ben-Shlomo, I, Moskovich, R, Golan, J et al. The effect of propofol anaesthesia on oocyte fertilisation and early embryo quality. Human Reproduction 2000; 15 (10): 21972199.Google Scholar
Ng, EH, Tang, OS, Chui, DK, Ho, PC. A prospective, randomized, double-blind and placebo-controlled study to assess the efficacy of paracervical block in the pain relief during egg collection in IVF. Hum Reprod. 1999;14:27832787.Google Scholar
Corson, SL, Batzer, FR, Gocial, B, Kelly, M, Gutmann, JN, Go, KJ, English, ME. Is paracervical block anesthesia for oocyte retrieval effective? Fertil Steril. 1994;62:133136.Google Scholar
Tummon, I, Newton, C, Lee, C, Martin, J. Lidocaine vaginal gel versus lidocaine paracervical block for analgesia during oocyte retrieval. Human Reproduction 2004; 19 (5): 11161120.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ng, EHY, Miao, B, Ho, PC. Anxiolytic premedication reduces preoperative anxiety and pain during oocyte retrieval. A randomised double-blinded placebo-controlled trial. Human Reproduction 2002; 17 (5); 12331238.Google Scholar
Bhattacharya, S, MacLennan, F, Hamilton, MPR, Templeton, A. How effective is patient-controlled analgesia? A randomised comparison of two protocols for pain relief during oocyte recovery. Human Reproduction. 1997; 12 (7): 14401442.Google Scholar
Lok, IH, Chan, MTV, Chan, DLW et al. A prospective randomized trial comparing patient-controlled sedation using propofol and alfentanil and physician-administered sedation using diazepam and pethidine during transvaginal ultrasound-guided oocyte retrieval. Human Reproduction 2002; 17 (8): 21012106.Google Scholar
Kwan, I, Bhattacharya, S, Know, F, McNeil, A. Conscious sedation and analgesia for oocyte retrieval during IVF procedures: a Cochrane review. Human Reproduction 2006; 21 (7): 16721679.Google Scholar
Bennett, SJ, Waterstone, JJ, Cheng, WC, Parsons, J. Complications of transvaginal Ultrasound-Directed Follicle Aspiration: A review of 2670 Consecutive Procedures. J Assisted Reproduction & Genetics 1993; 10 (1): 7277.Google Scholar
Tureck, RW, Garcia, CR, Blasco, L, Mastroianna, L Jr. Perioperative complications arising after transvaginal oocyte retrieval. Obstet Gynecol 1993; 81: 590–3.Google Scholar
Sowerby, E, Parsons, J. Prevention of iatrogenic pelvic infection during in vitro fertilization – current practice in the UK. Hum Fertil (Camb) 2004;7: 135–40.Google Scholar
Van Oostrom, N, De Sutter, P, Meys, J, Verstraelen, H. Risks associated with Bacterial Vaginosis in infertility patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Human Reproduction 2013; 28 (7): 18091815.Google Scholar
Van Os, HC, Roozenburg, BJ, Janssen-Caspers, HA et al. Vaginal disinfection with povidin iodine and the outcome of in-vitro fertilisation. Human Reproduction 1992; 7 (3): 349350.Google Scholar
Hannoun, A, Awwad, J, Zreik, T, Ghaziri, G, Abu-Musa, A. Effect of betadine vaginal preparation during oocyte aspiration in in-vitro fertilisation cycles on pregnancy outcome. Gynaecol Obstet Invest. 2008; 66 (4): 274278.Google Scholar
Dessole, S, Rubattu, G, Ambrosini, G et al. Blood loss following non-complicated transvaginal oocyte retrieval for in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 2001;76: 205–6.Google Scholar
Liberty, G, Hyman, JH, Eldar-Geva, T et al. Ovarian hemorrhage after transvaginal ultrasonographically guided oocyte aspiration: a potentially catastrophic and not so rare complication among lean patients with polycystic ovary syndrome. Fertil Steril. 2010;93: 874–9.Google Scholar
Dicker, D, Ashkenazi, J, Feldberg, D et al. Severe abdominal complications after transvaginal ultrasonographically guided retrieval of oocytes for in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer. Fertil Steril 1993; 59: 1313–5.Google Scholar
Tureck, RW, García, CR, Blasco, L, Mastroianni, L, Jr. Perioperative complications arising after transvaginal oocyte retrieval. Obstet Gynecol 1993; 81: 590–3.Google Scholar
Moini, A, Malekzadeh, F, Amirchaghmaghi, E et al. Risk factors associated with endometriosis among infertile Iranian women. Arch Med Sci 2013; 9: 506–14.Google Scholar
Jayaprakasan, K, Becker, C, Mittal, M on behalf of the Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. The Effect of Surgery for Endometriomas. Scientific Impact paper number 55. BJOG 2017; DOI: 10.1111/1471–0528.14834Google Scholar
Miller, PB, Price, T, Nichols, JE, Jr., Hill, L. Acute ureteral obstruction following transvaginal oocyte retrieval for IVF. Hum Reprod 2002; 17: 137–8.Google Scholar
Almog, B, Rimon, E, Yovel, I et al. Vertebral osteomyelitis: a rare complication of transvaginal ultrasound-guided oocyte retrieval. Fertil Steril 2000; 73: 1250–2.Google Scholar
Esposito, J, Qin, S Kovacs, G. How much inconvenience and discomfort does modern IVF treatment cause? Glob J Reprod Med 2017;1(2):MS.ID.555557Google Scholar
Gawande, A. The Checklist Manifesto. 2010 Profile Books London.Google Scholar