Por favor, use este identificador para citar o enlazar este ítem: https://hdl.handle.net/11000/34651

Random-start ovarian stimulation in an oocyte donation programme: a large, single-centre, experience


no-thumbnailVer/Abrir:

 Random-start ovarian stimulation in an oocyte donation programme a large, single-centre, experience.pdf



926,98 kB
Adobe PDF
Compartir:

Este recurso está restringido

Título :
Random-start ovarian stimulation in an oocyte donation programme: a large, single-centre, experience
Autor :
Guerrero, Jaime  
Castillo, Juan Carlos  
Ten, Jorge  
Ortiz, José Antonio
Lledó, Belén
Orozco-Beltran, Domingo  
Quereda, Francisco  
Bernabeu, Andrea
Bernabeu, Rafael
Editor :
Elsevier
Departamento:
Departamentos de la UMH::Medicina Clínica
Departamentos de la UMH::Salud Pública, Historia de la Ciencia y Ginecología
Fecha de publicación:
2024-01
URI :
https://hdl.handle.net/11000/34651
Resumen :
Research question: Do live birth rates differ between recipients matched with donors using conventional ovarian stimulation compared with those using random-start protocols? Design: Retrospective analysis of 891 ovarian stimulations in egg donors (January-December 2018) and clinical outcomes in matched recipients (n = 935). Donors commenced ovarian stimulation on day 1-3 of the menstrual cycle (n = 223) or in the mid/late-follicular (n = 388) or luteal phase (n = 280) under a conventional antagonist protocol. Live birth rate of matched recipients was the main outcome. Results: Duration of stimulation and total gonadotrophin dose were comparable between conventional versus random-start groups. The number of collected eggs were similar (17.6 ± 8.8 versus 17.2 ± 8.5, P = 0.6, respectively). Sub-group analysis showed that stimulation length (10.2 ± 1.8 versus 9.8 ± 1.7 versus 10.4 ± 1.7, P < 0.001) and gonadotrophin consumption (2041.5 ± 645.3 versus 2003.2 ± 647.3 versus 2158.2 ± 685.7 IU, P = 0.01) differed significantly between the conventional, mid/late follicular and luteal phase groups, respectively. In matched recipients receiving fresh oocytes and undergoing fresh embryo transfer, the biochemical pregnancy (63.8% and 63.3%; P = 0.9), clinical pregnancy (54.6% and 56.1%; P = 0.8) and live birth rates (47.7% and 46.6%; P = 0.7) per embryo-transfer were similar between conventional versus random groups. Similar results were obtained in recipients receiving vitrified eggs. Euploidy rate was also comparable. Conclusions: No notable variations were found in clinical outcomes using oocytes obtained from random-start protocols and those proceeding from conventional ovarian stimulation in oocyte donation treatments. Luteal-phase stimulation seems to require longer stimulation and higher FSH consumption. Random-start stimulation strategy does not impair the potential of the oocyte yield or clinical outcomes in oocyte donation cycles.
Palabras clave/Materias:
ovarian stimulation
random-start IVF
oocyte donationcycles
follicular waves
live birth
Tipo de documento :
info:eu-repo/semantics/article
Derechos de acceso:
info:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess
Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 Internacional
DOI :
10.1016/j.rbmo.2023.103572
Aparece en las colecciones:
Artículos Salud Pública, Historia de la Ciencia y Ginecología



Creative Commons La licencia se describe como: Atribución-NonComercial-NoDerivada 4.0 Internacional.