Journals / GORM:Gynecology Obstetrics & Reproductive Medicine / 2008 / Cilt: 14 - Sayı: 3

Daha önceki IVF siklusunda yetersiz endometrial gelişimi olan kadınlar da gonadotropin agonist ya da antagonistlerin endometriyuma olan etkilerinin karşılaştırılması; randomize paralel grup, pilot çalışma

Comparison of the effects of gonadotropin releasing hormone agonists and antagonists on endometrial development in women who had inadequate endometrial development in a previous assisted reproduction treatment cycle; a randomised parallel group pilot trial

Pages
166–171
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

CONCLUSION: Cetrorelix seems to provide better outcome than leuprolide acetate in IVF cycles with poor endometrial responders

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:OBJECTIVE: To analyse the effects of GnRH agonist or antagonist administration on endometrium of patients with poor prognostic feasures of endometrium undergoing IVF STUDY DESIGN: A randomised controlled trial was done in 152 women undergoing an assisted reproduction treatment cycle subsequent to an unsuccessful cycle in which they had demonstrated poor endometrial growth.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Assited reproduction treatment using standard stimulation protocols were used, implantation, clinical and ongoing pregnancy rates were compared in the two groups.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:CONCLUSION: Cetrorelix seems to provide better outcome than leuprolide acetate in IVF cycles with poor endometrial responders
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To analyse the effects of GnRH agonist or antagonist administration on endometrium of patients with poor prognostic feasures of endometrium undergoing IVF STUDY DESIGN: A randomised controlled trial was done in 152 women undergoing an assisted reproduction treatment cycle subsequent to an unsuccessful cycle in which they had demonstrated poor endometrial growth. Assited reproduction treatment using standard stimulation protocols were used, implantation, clinical and ongoing pregnancy rates were compared in the two groups. RESULT: A total of 152 patients were included in the trial. 76 women were allocated to stimulation with the long GnRH agonist protocol while 76 women were allocated to stimulation with the flexible GnRH antagonist protocol. The total oocyte number, the number of excellent quality embryos and the number of embryo transfered were not significantly different between the groups. Implantation rate of cetrotide group was higher than leuprolide group which was not statistically significant (24.1% versus 15.3, p=0.068). The clinical and ongoing PRs rates in the cetrotide group were significantly higher than in the leuprolide group (clinical pregnancy rate 55.2% versus 32.8%, p=0.054, ongoing pregnancy rate 44.7% versus 27.6 %, p=0.028, respectively). CONCLUSION: Cetrorelix seems to provide better outcome than leuprolide acetate in IVF cycles with poor endometrial responders

Özet

IVF uygulanan kötü prognostic endometriyuma sahip hastalarda GnRH agonisti veya antagonistinin endometriyuma etkisinin araştırılması amaçlandı. Zayıf endometrial gelişim göstererek başarısız bir siklusa ardışık olarak IVF uygulanan 152 kadında kontrollü randomize bir çalışma yapıldı. Yardımcı üreme tedavisinde standart stimülasyon protokolleri kullanıldı, her grupta implantasyon, klinik ve devam eden gebelik oranları karşılaştırıldı. Total olarak 152 hasta çalışmaya dahil edildi. Bunlardan 76 tanesi uzun GnRH agonist protokolüne alındı, 76 kadın da esnek GnRH antagonist protokollüne alındı. Gruplar arasında total oosit sayısı, iyi kalite embiryo sayısı ve transfer edilen embiryo sayısı açısından anlamlı olarak farklılık yoktu. İmplantasyon oranı cetorelix grubunda leuprolide grubundan daha fazla olup istatistiksel olarak anlamlı değildi (%24.1 karşılık %15.3, p= 0.68). Klinik ve devam eden gebelik oranları cetrorelix grubunda leuprolide grubundan anlamlı olarak yüksekti (sırasıyla, %55.2 karşılık %32.8, p=0.054; %44.7 karşılık %27.6, p= 0.028).Kötü endometrial cevaplı IVF siklüslarında cetrorelix'in leupro-lid'den daha iyi sonuç sağlayabileceği görünmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

LEYLEK, Ö. A., ATA, B., APİ, M., İKİDAĞ, A., URMAN, B. (2008). Daha önceki IVF siklusunda yetersiz endometrial gelişimi olan kadınlar da gonadotropin agonist ya da antagonistlerin endometriyuma olan etkilerinin karşılaştırılması; randomize paralel grup, pilot çalışma. GORM:Gynecology Obstetrics & Reproductive Medicine, Cilt: 14 - Sayı: 3, 166–171. https://ajindex.com/articles/227718

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Raga F, Casan Em, Kruessel JS, Wen Y, Huang HY, Nezhat C, Polan M. Quantitative gonadotropin-releasing hormone gene expression and immunohistochemical localization in human endometrium throughout the menstrual cycle. Biol Reprod 1998
  2. Stojilkovic SS, Catt KJ. Expression and signal transduction pathways of gonadotropin-releasşng hormone receptors. Repent Prog Horm Res 1995
  3. Wolfahrt S, Kleine B, Rogsmanith WG. Detection of gonadotropin-releasing hormone and its receptor mRNA in human placental trophoblasts using in-situ reverse tran-scription-polymerase chain reaction. Mol Huni Reprod 1998
  4. Raga F, Casan EM, Wen Y, Huang HY, Bonilla- Musoles F, Polan ML. Independent regulation of matrix metallo-proteinase-9, tissue inhibitor of metalloproteinase-1 (TIMP-1), and TIMP-3 in human endometrial stromal cells by gonadotropin-releasing hormone: implications in early human implantation. J clin Endocrinol Metab 1999
  5. Luo X, Xu J, Chegini N. Gonadotropin releasing hormone analogue (GnRHa) alters the expression and activation of smad in human endometrial epithelial and stromal cells. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2003
  6. Hermandez ER.Embrio implantation: the rubicon for GnRH antagonists. Hum Reprod 2000
  7. Devroey P, Bourgain C, Macklon NS, Fauser BC. Reproductive biology and IVF: ovarian stimulation and endometrial receptivity. Trends Endocrinol Metab 2004
  8. Simon C, Oberye J, Bellver J, Vidal C, Bosch E, Horcajadas JA, Murphy C, Adamormal S, Riesewijk A, Mannaerts B, Pellicer A. Similar endometrial development in oocyte donors treated with either high-or standard-dose GnRH antagonist compared to treatment with a GnRH agonist or in natural cycles. Hum Reprod 2005
  9. Meresman GF, Bilotas M, Buquet RA, Baranao RI, Sueldo C, Tesone M. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist induces apoptosis and reduces cell proliferation in eutopic endometrial cultures from women with endometriosis. Fertil Steril 2003
  10. Jaffe R, Warsof SL. Color Doppler Imaging in Obstetrics and Gynecology. Newyork, McGraw-Hill press, 1992. 11.Xavier P, Gamboa C, Calejo L, Silva J, Stevenson D, Nunes A, Martines-de-Oliveira J. A randomised study of Gn RH antagonist (cetrorelix) versus agonist (busereline) for controlled ovarian stimulation: effect on safety and efficacy. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2005
  11. Hofmann GE, Sosnowski JP, Warikoo P, Bertsche A. Use of a gonadotropin-releasi