Skip to main content Accessibility help

We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.

Close cookie message
×
Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-5nwft Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-14T04:49:19.163Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 12 - Ovarian Stimulation in Difficult IVF Cases

from Section 3 - Difficulties and Complications of Ovarian Stimulation and Implantation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  14 April 2022

By
Amina Oumeziane  and
Samira Barbara
Edited by
Mohamed Aboulghar  and
Botros Rizk
Mohamed Aboulghar
Affiliation:
University of Cairo IVF Centre
Botros Rizk
Affiliation:
University of South Alabama
Get access

Summary

Poor ovarian responders (PORs) are the most challenging patients in assisted reproductive technology (ART) and account for 9 to 24 percent of in vitro fertilization (IVF) patients [1]. The difficulties to classify these patients are due to the lack of clear definition, 47 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 41 different definitions were reported [2].

Type
Chapter
Information
Ovarian Stimulation , pp. 109 - 118
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2022

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

Keay, SD, Liversedge, NH, Mathur, RS, Jenkins, JM. Assisted conception following poor ovarian response to gonadotrophin stimulation. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1997;104(5):521–527.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Polyzos, NP, Nwoye, M, Corona, R, et al. Live birth rates in Bologna poor responders treated with ovarian stimulation for IVF/ICSI. Reprod Biomed Online 2014;28(4):469–474.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ferraretti, AP, La Marca, A, Fauser, BCJM, et al.; 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 Hum Reprod 2011;26(7):1616–1624. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/der092.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Younis, JS. The Bologna criteria for poor ovarian response; has the job been accomplished? Hum Reprod 2012;27(6): 1874–1875. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/des118.Google Scholar
Frydman, R. Poor responders: still a problem Fertil Steril 2011;96(5):1057. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.09.051.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Humaidan, P, Alviggi, C, Fischer, R, Esteves, SC. The novel POSEIDON stratification of ‘Low prognosis patients in Assisted Reproductive Technology’ and its proposed marker of successful outcome. F1000Res 2016;5:2911. doi:10.12688/f1000research.10382.1.Google Scholar
Younis, JS. Ovarian aging and implications for fertility female health. Minerva Endocrinol 2012;37(1):41–57.Google Scholar
De Ziegler, D, Borghese, B, Chapron, C. Endometriosis and infertility: pathophysiology and management. Lancet 2010;376(9742):730–738. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60490-4.Google Scholar
Coccia, ME, Rizzello, F, Mariani, G, et al. Ovarian surgery for bilateral endometriomas influences age at menopause. Hum Reprod 2011;26(11):3000–3007. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/der286.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wouter, JK, Hehenkamp, NA, Volkers, FJM, et al. Loss of ovarian reserve after uterine artery embolization: a randomized comparison with hysterectomy. Hum Reprod 2007;22(7):1996–2005. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dem105.Google Scholar
Almog, B, Shehata, F, Sheizaf, B, Tan, SL, Tulandi, T. Effects of ovarian endometrioma on the number of oocytes retrieved for in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 2011;95(2):525–527.Google Scholar
Soto, N, Iñiguez, G, López, P, et al. Anti-Müllerian hormone and inhibin B levels as markers of premature ovarian aging and transition to menopause in type 1 diabetes mellitus Hum Reprod 2009;24(11):2838–2844. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dep276.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Chang, H, Chen, M, Lu, M, et al. Iron overload is associated with low anti‐müllerian hormone in women with transfusion‐dependent β‐thalassaemia. BJOG 2011;118: 825–831. doi:10.1111/j.1471-0528.2011.02927.x.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
De Vos, M, Devroey, P, Fauser, BC. Primary ovarian insufficiency. Lancet 2010;376(9744):911–921.Google Scholar
Fritz, MA, Speroff, L. Clinical Gynecologic Endocrinology and Infertility, 8th ed. Philadelphia: Wolters Kluwer Health/Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2011.Google Scholar
Persani, L, Rossetti, R, Cacciatore, C. Genes involved in human premature ovarian failure. J Mol Endocrinol 2010;45(5):257–279. https://jme.bioscientifica.com/view/journals/jme/45/5/257.xml.Google Scholar
Broer, SL, Dólleman, M, van Disseldorp, J, et al.; IPD-EXPORT Study Group. Prediction of an excessive response in in vitro fertilization from patient characteristics and ovarian reserve tests and comparison in subgroups: an individual patient data meta-analysis. Fertil Steril 2013;100(2):420.e7–429.e7.Google Scholar
La Marca, A, Sunkara, SK. Individualization of controlled ovarian stimulation in IVF using ovarian reserve markers: from theory to practice. Hum Reprod Update 2014;20(1):124–140. https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmt037.Google Scholar
Surrey, S, Schoolcraft, WB. Evaluating strategies for improving ovarian response of the poor responder undergoing assisted reproductive techniques. Fertil Steril 2000;73(4):667–676.Google Scholar
Al-Inany, H, Aboulghar, M. GnRH antagonist in assisted reproduction: a Cochrane review. Hum Reprod 2002;17(4):874–885. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/17.4.874.Google Scholar
Land, JA, Yarmolinskaya, MI, Dumoulin, JC, Evers, JL. High-dose human menopausal gonadotropin stimulation in poor responders does not improve in vitro fertilization outcome. Fertil Steril 1996;65(5):961–965.Google Scholar
Tarlatzis, BC, Zepiridis, L, Grimbizis, G, Bontis, J. Clinical management of low ovarian response to stimulation for IVF: a systematic review. Hum Reprod Update 2003;9(1):61–76.Google Scholar
Pandian, Z, McTavish, AR, Aucott, L, Hamilton, MPR, Bhattacharya, S. Interventions for ‘poor responders’ to controlled ovarian hyper stimulation (COH) in in‐vitro fertilisation (IVF). Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010;1:CD004379. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD004379.pub3.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(10):2742–2749. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/der240.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(1):147–153.Google Scholar
Lambalk, CB, Banga, FR, Huirne, JA, et al. GnRH antagonist versus long agonist protocols in IVF: a systematic review and meta-analysis accounting for patient type. Hum Reprod Update 2017;23(5):560–579. https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmx017.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;26:1768–1774.Google Scholar
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? Hum Reprod 2016;31(2):370–376. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dev316.Google Scholar
Youssef, MA, van Wely, M, Mochtar, M, et al. Low dosing of gonadotropins in in vitro fertilization cycles for women with poor ovarian reserve: systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril 2017;109(2): 289–301.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Electronic address: . Comparison of pregnancy rates for poor responders using IVF with mild ovarian stimulation versus conventional IVF: a guideline Fertil Steril 2018;109(6):993–999.Google Scholar
Park, J-Y, Su, Y-Q, Ariga, M, et al. EGF-like growth factors as mediators of LH action in the ovulatory follicle. Science 2004;303:682–684.Google Scholar
Lehert, P, Kolibianakis, EM, Venetis, CA, et al. Recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone (r-hFSH) plus recombinant luteinizing hormone versus r-hFSH alone for ovarian stimulation during assisted reproductive technology: systematic review and meta-analysis. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2014;12:17. https://doi.org/10.1186/1477-7827-12-17.Google Scholar
Mochtar, MH, Danhof, NA, Ayeleke, RO, Van der Veen, F, van Wely, M. Recombinant luteinizing hormone (rLH) and recombinant follicle stimulating hormone (rFSH) for ovarian stimulation in IVF/ICSI cycles. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017;5:CD005070. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD005070.pub3.Google ScholarPubMed
Humaidan, P, Chin, W, Rogoff, D, et al. Efficacy and safety of follitropin alfa/lutropin alfa in ART: a randomized controlled trial in poor ovarian responders. Hum Reprod 2017;32(7):1537–1538.Google Scholar
Alviggi, C, Conforti, A, Esteves, SC, et al. Recombinant luteinizing hormone supplementation in assisted reproductive technology: a systematic review. Fertil Steril 2018;109(4):644–664.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fauser, BC, Alper, MM, Ledger, W, et al. Pharmacokinetics and follicular dynamics of corifollitropin alfa versus recombinant FSH during ovarian stimulation for IVF. Reprod Biomed Online 2010;21(5):593–601.Google Scholar
Polyzos, NP, Devos, M, Humaidan, P, et al. Corifollitropin alfa followed by rFSH in a GnRH antagonist protocol for poor ovarian responder patients: an observational pilot study. Fertil Steril 2013;99(2):422–426.Google Scholar
Kolibianakis, EM, Venetis, C.A. CA, J.K. Bosdou JK, et al. Corifollitropin alfa compared with follitropin beta in poor responders undergoing ICSI: a randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod 2015;30(2):432–440. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deu301.Google Scholar
Fabozzi, G, Giannini, A, Piscitelli, VP, Colicchia, A. Adjuvants therapies for women undergoing IVF: is there any evidence of their safety and efficacy? An updated mini-review. Obstet Gynecol Int J 2017;7(4):00254. doi: 10.15406/ogij.2017.07.00254.Google Scholar
Casson, PR, Lindsay, MS, Pisarska, MD, Carson, SA, Buster, JE. Dehydroepiandrosterone supplementation augments ovarian stimulation in poor responders: a case series. Hum Reprod 2000;15(10):2129–2132.Google Scholar
Weil, S, Vendola, K, Zhou, J, Bondy, CA. Androgen and follicle-stimulating hormone interactions in primate ovarian follicle development. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1999;84(8):2951–2956.Google Scholar
Prizant, H, Gleicher, N, Sen, A. Androgen actions in the ovary: balance is key. J Endocrinol 2014;222(3):R141–R151. https://joe.bioscientifica.com/view/journals/joe/222/3/R141.xml.Google Scholar
Nagels, HE, Rishworth, JR, Siristatidis, CS, Kroon, B. Androgens (dehydroepiandrosterone or testosterone) for women undergoing assisted reproduction. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015;11:CD009749. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD009749.pub2.Google Scholar
Zhang, M, Niu, W, Wang, Y, et al. Dehydroepiandrosterone treatment in women with poor ovarian response undergoing IVF or ICSI: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Assist Reprod Genet 2016;33:981–991. doi 10.1007/s10815-016-0713-5.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Haahr, T, Esteves, SC, Humaidan, P. Individualized controlled ovarian stimulation in expected poor-responders: an update. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2018;16(1):20. doi:10.1186/s12958-018-0342-1.Google Scholar
Duffy, JMN, Ahmad, G, Mohiyiddeen, L, Nardo, LG, Watson, A. Growth hormone for in vitro fertilization. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010;1:CD000099. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD000099.pub3.Google Scholar
Yoshimura, Y, Ando, M, Nagamatsu, S, et al. Effects of insulin-like growth factor-I on follicle growth, oocyte maturation, and ovarian steroidogenesis and plasminogen activator activity in the rabbit. Biol Reprod 1996;55(1):152–160.Google Scholar
Kolibianakis, E, Venetis, C, Diedrich, K, Tarlatzis, B, Griessinger, G. Addition of growth hormone to gonadotropins in ovarian stimulation of poor responders treated by in-vitro fertilization: a systemic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update 2009;15:613–622.Google Scholar
Jeve, YB, Bhandari, HM. Effective treatment protocol for poor ovarian response: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Hum Reprod Sci 2016;9:70–81.Google Scholar
Fanchin, R, Cunha-Filho, JS, Schonäuer, LM, et al. Coordination of early antral follicles by luteal estradiol administration provides a basis for alternative controlled ovarian hyperstimulation regimens. Fertil Steril 2003;79:316–321.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Fanchin, R, Salomon, L, Castelo‐Branco, A, et al. Luteal estradiol pre‐treatment coordinates follicular growth during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation with GnRH antagonists. Hum Reprod 2003;18(12):2698–2703. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deg516.Google Scholar
Reynolds, KA, Omurtag, KR, Jimenez, PT, et al. Cycle cancellation and pregnancy after luteal estradiol priming in women defined as poor responders: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod 2013;28(11):2981–2989.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Farquhar, C, Rombauts, L, Kremer, JAM, Lethaby, A, Ayeleke, RO. Oral contraceptive pill, progestogen or oestrogen pretreatment for ovarian stimulation protocols for women undergoing assisted reproductive techniques. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2017;5:CD006109. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD006109.pub3.Google ScholarPubMed
Garcia-Velasco, JA, Fatemi, HM. To pill or not to pill in GnRH antagonist cycles: that is the question! Reprod Biomed Online 2014;30(1):39–42.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cédrin-Durnerin, B, Bständig, I, Parneix, V, 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(1):109–116. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/del340.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(6):2382–2384.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bermejo, A, Iglesias, C, Ruiz-Alonso, M, et al. The impact of using the combined oral contraceptive pill for cycle scheduling on gene expression related to endometrial receptivity. Hum Reprod 2014;29(6):1271–1278. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deu065.Google 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; 29(6):684–691.Google Scholar
Baerwald, AR, Adams, GP, Pierson, RA. Characterization of ovarian follicular wave dynamics in women. Biol Reprod 2003;69(3):1023–1031. https://doi.org/10.1095/biolreprod.103.017772.Google Scholar
Ubaldi, FM, Capalbo, A, Vaiarelli, A, et al. Follicular versus luteal phase ovarian stimulation during the same menstrual cycle (DuoStim) in a reduced ovarian reserve population results in a similar euploid blastocyst formation rate: new insight in ovarian reserve exploitation. Fertil Steril 2016;105:1488.e1–1495.e1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cimadomo, D, Vaiarelli, A, Colamaria, S, et al. Luteal phase anovulatory follicles result in the production of competent oocytes: intra-patient paired case-control study comparing follicular versus luteal phase stimulations in the same ovarian cycle. Hum Reprod 2018;33(8):1442–1448. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dey217.Google Scholar
Humaidan, P, Ejdrup Bredkjær, H, Bungum, L, et al. GnRH agonist (buserelin) or hCG for ovulation induction in GnRH antagonist IVF/ICSI cycles: a prospective randomized study. Hum Reprod 2005;20(5):1213–1220. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deh765.Google Scholar
Lin, MH, Wu, FS, Lee, RK, et al. Dual trigger with combination of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist and human chorionic gonadotropin significantly improves the live-birth rate for normal responders in GnRH-antagonist cycles. Fertil Steril 2013;100(5):1296–1302.Google Scholar
Zhang, J, Wang, Y, Mao, X, et al. Dual trigger of final oocyte maturation in poor ovarian responders undergoing IVF/ICSI cycles. Reprod Biomed Online 2017;35(6):701–707.Google Scholar
Eser, A, Devranoğlu, B, Bostanc Ergen, E, Yayla Abide, Ç. Dual trigger with gonadotropin-releasing hormone and human chorionic gonadotropin for poor responders. J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc 2018;19(2):98–103.Google Scholar
Cobo, A, Garrido, N, Crespo, J, José, R, Pellicer, A. Accumulation of oocytes: a new strategy for managing low-responder patients. Reprod Biomed Online 2012;24(4):424–432.Google Scholar
Chatziparasidou, A, Nijs, M, Moisidou, M, et al. Accumulation of oocytes and/or embryos by vitrification: a new strategy for managing poor responder patients undergoing pre implantation diagnosis. F1000Res 2014;2:240.Google Scholar
Çelik, S, Turgut, NE, Cengiz Çelik, D, et al. The effect of the pooling method on the live birth rate in poor ovarian responders according to the Bologna criteria. Turk J Obstet Gynecol 2018;15(1):39–45.Google Scholar
Roque, M, Valle, M, Sampaio, M, Geber, S. Does freeze-all policy affect IVF outcomes in poor responders? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2018;52(4):530–534. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.19000.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Haahr, T, Esteves, SC, Humaidan, P. Individualized controlled ovarian stimulation in expected poor-responders: an update. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2018;16(1):20. doi:10.1186/s12958-018-0342-1.Google Scholar
Sighinolfi, G, Sunkara, SK, La Marca, A. New strategies of ovarian stimulation based on the concept of ovarian follicular waves: from conventional to random and double stimulation. Reprod Biomed Online 2018;37(4):489–497.Google Scholar

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×