Repository logo
  • English
  • 中文
  • Log In
    New user? Click here to register.Have you forgotten your password?
Repository logo
    Communities & Collections
    Research Outputs
    Fundings & Projects
    People
    Organizations
    Statistics
  • English
  • 中文
  • Log In
    New user? Click here to register.Have you forgotten your password?
  1. Home
  2. Chung Shan Medical University
  3. Pure學術人才庫轉入
  4. GnRH agonist long protocol versus GnRH antagonist protocol for various aged patients with diminished ovarian reserve
 
  • Details
Options

GnRH agonist long protocol versus GnRH antagonist protocol for various aged patients with diminished ovarian reserve

Other Title
A retrospective study
Journal
PLOS ONE
Date Issued
2018-11-01
Author(s)
SHU-LING TZENG  
CHUN-I LEE  
TSUNG-HSIEN LEE  
DOI
10.1371/journal.pone.0207081
URI
https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85056263800
https://scholars.csmu.edu.tw/handle/123456789/29056
Abstract
This retrospective analysis compared the efficiency of the gonadotropin- releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist (GnRH-ant) protocol and the GnRH agonist long (GnRH-a) protocol for patients with diminished ovarian reserve (DOR). A total of 1,233 patients with DOR (anti- Mullerian hormone <1.1 ng/mL) were recruited for this retrospective case-control study. They were divided into two groups according to female age. Younger patients were assigned to POSEIDON group3 (PG3: Age <35 years); older patients were assigned to POSEIDON group 4 (PG4: Age >35 years). All patients with DOR underwent controlled ovarian stimulation and fresh embryo transfer (ET) on day 3. We recruited 283 GnRH-a and 54 GnRH-ant cycles for PG3, and 663 GnRH-a and 233 GnRH-ant cycles for PG4. In PG3, the GnRH-a protocol was associated with a lower ET cancellation rate (30/283 = 10.2% vs. 12/54 = 22.2%, p = 0.018) and a higher live birth rate (7/54 = 13.0% vs. 78/283 = 27.6%, p = 0.024) than the GnRH-ant protocol for the initiated cycles. Furthermore, the GnRH-a protocol was correlated with a higher implantation rate than the GnRH-ant protocol for ET cycles (146/577 = 25.3% vs. 11/103 = 10.7%, P = 0.027). No differences in the ET cancellation rate, live birth rate and implantation rate between GnRH-a and GnRH-ant groups were observed among PG4 patients. In conclusion, the GnRH-a protocol was more effective than the GnRH-ant protocol for young patients with DOR. The low ET cancellation rate and high implantation rate may be related to embryo quality or endometrial receptivity, which warrant further investigation.
Type
journal article
Make it your own

DSpace-CRIS can be extensively configured to meet your needs. Decide which information need to be collected and available with fine-grained security. Start updating the theme to match your Institution's web identity.

Built with DSpace-CRIS software - Extension maintained and optimized by 4Science

  • Cookie settings
  • Privacy policy
  • End User Agreement
  • Send Feedback