IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ibn/gjhsjl/v8y2016i4p166.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of GnRh Agonist Microdose Flare Up and GnRh Antagonist/Letrozole in Treatment of Poor Responder Patients in Intra Cytoplaspic Sperm Injection: Randomized Clinical Trial

Author

Listed:
  • Azar Nabati
  • Sepideh Peivandi
  • Alireza Khalilian
  • Sina Mirzaeirad
  • Seyyed Abbas Hashemi

Abstract

BACKGROUNDS- the prevalence of infertility is up to 10 to 15 % which 9 to 24 % of them are Poor Ovarian Responders (POR). This study was designed to compare two methods of GnRH Agonist Microdose Flareup (MF) and GnRH Antagonist/Letrozole (AL) in treatment of these patients. METHODS & MATERIALS- this randomized clinical trial study consisted of 123 patients. In the first step of treatment in both methods FSH, LH, estradiol, anderostandion, testestron in third day of menstruation period and the thickness of endometrium by Transvaginal sonography were evaluated. At the time of HCG injection the thickness of endometrium and follicles which were more than 14mm ware established and hormones were evaluated. Two weeks later serum βhCG and after 6 to 8 weeks Transvaginal sonography were applied to prove the pregnancy. RESULTS- there were 61 patients with mean age of 38.7±4.58 in MF group and 62 patients with mean age of 38.5±4.6 in AL group (P=0.80). At the time of hCG injection there were significant increase in the level of LH,estradiol, thickness of endometrium and follicles more than 14mm in MF patients (P<0.0001). The mean time of ovary stimulation in MF group was 10.72±1.5 and in AL was 8.45±1.2 (P<0.0001). The mean level of gonadotropin which were used was 80.6±20.1 in MF patients and 64.7±16.4 in AL group (P<0.0001). 18 % of MF group and 38.7% in AL group had no normal cycle of ovulation (OR- 2.87, 95% CI- 1.25-6.57, P=0.011). The mean numbers of oocyte and normal fetus in MF was 5.83±3.5 and 3.7±2.5 and in AL was 3±1.69 and 1.4±1.33 (P<0.0001). The number of chemical pregnancy in MF group was 10 (16.4%) and in AL was 3 (4.8%) (OR-3.85, 95%CI-1.06-14.77, P=0.037). Clinical pregnancy in 10 patients (16.4%) of MF group and 3 (4.8%)in AL was reported. OR- 3.85, 95%CI- 1.06-14.77, P=0.037). CONCLUSION- this study showed that MF method of pregnancy leads to more positive results in pregnancy based on chemical and clinical evaluation in comparison with AL and is advised for poor responder patients.

Suggested Citation

  • Azar Nabati & Sepideh Peivandi & Alireza Khalilian & Sina Mirzaeirad & Seyyed Abbas Hashemi, 2016. "Comparison of GnRh Agonist Microdose Flare Up and GnRh Antagonist/Letrozole in Treatment of Poor Responder Patients in Intra Cytoplaspic Sperm Injection: Randomized Clinical Trial," Global Journal of Health Science, Canadian Center of Science and Education, vol. 8(4), pages 166-166, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:ibn:gjhsjl:v:8:y:2016:i:4:p:166
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/gjhs/article/download/49728/27887
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: http://www.ccsenet.org/journal/index.php/gjhs/article/view/49728
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • R00 - Urban, Rural, Regional, Real Estate, and Transportation Economics - - General - - - General
    • Z0 - Other Special Topics - - General

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ibn:gjhsjl:v:8:y:2016:i:4:p:166. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Canadian Center of Science and Education (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/cepflch.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.