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-sjtt6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-28T03:28:04.714Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 17 - Common Stimulation Regimens in Assisted Reproductive Technology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 June 2019

By
Sesh K. Sunkara
Edited by
Jane A. Stewart
Jane A. Stewart
Affiliation:
Newcastle Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust
Get access

Summary

Since the early days of in vitro fertilisation (IVF), the results of IVF treatment have much improved with a 32.8% live birth rate being reported for women aged under 35 years in the United Kingdom in the year 2012 [1]. The paradigm shift from natural unifollicular IVF treatment cycles to multifollicular stimulated IVF treatment cycles has been an important contributing factor to this improvement, largely enabled by the availability of ovulation induction drugs. It has led to the evolution of the concept of superovulation whereby the ovaries are stimulated to produce high numbers of good quality oocytes that will compensate in part for the deficiencies in IVF and cleavage, and facilitate a yield of good numbers of high quality embryos available for transfer, thereby increasing the probability of pregnancy. Ovarian stimulation is now an essential part of IVF with 98.3% of IVF in the United Kingdom being stimulated cycles in 2013 [1].

Type
Chapter
Information
Subfertility, Reproductive Endocrinology and Assisted Reproduction , pp. 131 - 137
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

Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority. www.hfea.gov.uk/9461.html. Last accessed on 26 September 2015.Google Scholar
le Nstour, E, Marraoui, J, Lahlou, N, Roger, M, De, ZD, Bouchard, P. Role of estradiol in the rise in follicle-stimulating hormone levels during the luteal-follicular transition. J Clin Endocr Metab 1993:77;439–42.Google Scholar
Brown, JB. Pituitary control of ovarian function: concepts derived from gonadotrophin therapy. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 1978:18;47–54.Google Scholar
Fauser, BCJM and Van Heusden, AM. Manipulation of human ovarian function: Physiological concepts and clinical consequences. Endocr Rev 1997:18;71–106.Google ScholarPubMed
Hsueh, AJW. Paracrine mechanisms involved in granulosa cell differentiation. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1986:15;117–34.Google Scholar
Sunkara, SK, Rittenberg, V, Raine-Fenning, N, Bhattacharya, S, Zamora, J, Coomarasamy, A. 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.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
La Marca, A and Sunkara, SK. Individualization of controlled ovarian stimulation in IVF using ovarian reserve markers: from theory to practice. Hum Reprod Update 2014;20:124–40.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Siristatidis, CS, Gibreel, A, Basios, G, Maheshwari, A, Bhattacharya, S. Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist protocols for pituitary suppression in assisted reproduction. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2015; Issue 11. Art. No.: CD006919. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006919.pub4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
van Wely, M, Kwan, I, Burt, AL, Thomas, J, Vail, A, Van der Veen, F, Al-Inany, HG. Recombinant versus urinary gonadotrophin for ovarian stimulation in assisted reproductive technology cycles. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011: Issue 2. Art. No.: CD005354. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD005354.pub2.Google Scholar
Wide, L, Eriksson, K, Sluss, PM, Hall, JE. The common genetic variant of luteinizing hormone has a longer serum half-life than the wild type in heterozygous women. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2010;95:383–9.Google Scholar
Youssef, MA, Al-Inany, HG, Aboulghar, M, Mansour, R, Abou-Setta, AM. Recombinant versus urinary human chorionic gonadotrophin for final oocyte maturation triggering in IVF and ICSI cycles. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011a: Issue 4. Art. No.: CD003719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Youssef, MA, Van der Veen, F, Al-Inany, HG, Griesinger, G, Mochtar, MH, Aboulfoutouh, I, Khattab, SM, van Wely, M. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist versus HCG for oocyte triggering in antagonist assisted reproductive technology cycles. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011b: Issue 10. Art. No.: CD008046.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Broekmans, FJ, Kwee, J, Hendriks, DJ, Mol, BW, Lambalk, CB. A systematic review of tests predicting ovarian reserve and IVF outcome. Hum Reprod Update. 2006;12:685–718.Google Scholar
Broer, SL, van Disseldorp, J, Broeze, KA, Dolleman, M, Opmeer, BC, Bossuyt, P, Eijkemans, MJ, Mol, BW, Broekmans, FJ; IMPORT study group. Added value of ovarian reserve testing on patient characteristics in the prediction of ovarian response and ongoing pregnancy: an individual patient data approach. Hum Reprod Update 2013;19:26–36.Google Scholar
Broer, S, Madeleine, D, Disseldorp, J, Broeze, KA, Opmeer, BC, Patrick, MM. Bossuyt, P Eijkemans, MJ.C, Mol, BW, Broekmans, FJM; on behalf of the 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;100:420–9.Google Scholar
Ferraretti, AP, La Marca, A, Fauser, BC, Tarlatzis, B, Nargund, G, Gianaroli, L; 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;26:1616–24.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ng, EH, Tang, OS, Ho, PC. The significance of the number of antral follicles prior to stimulation in predicting ovarian responses in an IVF programme. Hum Reprod 2000;15:1937–42.Google Scholar
Aflatoonian, A, Oskouian, H, Ahmadi, S, Oskouian, L. Prediction of high ovarian response to controlled ovarian hyperstimulation: anti-Mullerian hormone versus small Antral follicle count (2–6 mm). J Assist Reprod Genet 2009;26:319–25.Google Scholar
Arce, JC, La Marca, A, Mirner Klein, B, Nyboe Andersen, A, Fleming, R. Antimullerian hormone in gonadotropin releasing-hormone antagonist cycles: prediction of ovarian response and cumulative treatment outcome in good-prognosis patients. Fertil Steril 2013;99:1644–53.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Polyzos, NP, Tournaye, H, Guzman, L, Camus, M, Nelson, SM. Predictors of ovarian response in women treated with corifollitropin alfa for in vitro fertilization/ intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Fertil Steril 2013;100:438–44.Google Scholar
Yong, PY, Brett, S, Baird, DT, Thong, KJ. A prospective randomized clinical trial comparing 150 IU and 225 IU of recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone (Gonal-F*) in a fixed-dose regimen for controlled ovarian stimulation in in vitro fertilization treatment. Fertil Steril 2003;79:308–15.Google Scholar
Jayaprakasan, K, Hopkisson, J, Campbell, B, Johnson, I, Thornton, J, Raine-Fenning, N. 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.Google Scholar
Berkkanoglu, M and Ozgur, K. What is the optimum maximal gonadotropin dosage used in microdose flare-up cycles in poor responders? Fertil Steril 2010;94:662–5.Google Scholar
Al-Inany, HG, Youssef, MA, Aboulghar, M, Broekmans, F, Sterrenburg, M, Smit, J, Abou-Setta, AM. Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonists for assisted reproductive technology. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2011; Issue 5. Art. No.: CD001750.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
Lin, H, Li, Y, Li, L, Wang, W, Yang, D, Zhang, Q. Is a GnRH antagonist protocol better in PCOS patients? A meta-analysis of RCTs. PLoS One. 2014;9:e91796.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Shapiro, BS, Daneshmand, ST, Garner, FC, Aguirre, M, Thomas, S. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist combined with a reduced dose of human chorionic gonadotropin for final oocyte maturation in fresh autologous cycles of in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 2008;90:231–3.Google Scholar
Humaidan, P, Ejdrup Bredkjaer, H, Westergaard, LG, Yding, AC. 1,500 IU human chorionic gonadotropin administered at oocyte retrieval rescues the luteal phase when gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist is used for ovulation induction: a prospective, randomized, controlled study. Fertil Steril 2010;93:847–54.Google Scholar
Engmann, L, DiLuigi, A, Schmidt, D, Nulsen, J, Maier, D, Benadiva, C. The use of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist to induce oocyte maturation after cotreatment with GnRH antagonist in high-risk patients undergoing in vitro fertilization prevents the risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome: a prospective randomized controlled study. Fertil Steril 2008;89:84–91.Google Scholar
Papanikolaou, EG, Verpoest, W, Fatemi, H, Tarlatzis, B, Devroey, P, Tournaye, H. A novel method of luteal supplementation with recombinant luteinizing hormone when a gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist is used instead of human chorionic gonadotropin for ovulation triggering: a randomized prospective proof of concept study. Fertil Steril 2011; 95:1174–7.Google Scholar
Pirard, C, Donnez, J, Loumaye, E. GnRH agonist as luteal phase support in assisted reproduction technique cycles: results of a pilot study. Hum Reprod 2006;21:1894–900.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

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
×