The efficacy of mild stimulation protocol in in vitro fertilization in Hai Phong Hospital of obstetrics and gynecology from 1/2016 to 6/2017
PDF (Tiếng Việt)

Working Languages

How to Cite

Vu, V. T., & Do, D. H. (2018). The efficacy of mild stimulation protocol in in vitro fertilization in Hai Phong Hospital of obstetrics and gynecology from 1/2016 to 6/2017 . Vietnam Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology, 16(1), 169 - 172. https://doi.org/10.46755/vjog.2018.1.722

Abstract

Objectives: To compare the efficacy of mild stimulation protocol versus short Antagonist protocol in in vitro fertilization in Haiphong Hospital of Obstetrics and Gynecology from 1/2016 to 6/2017.

Subjects and method: A randomized controlled clinical trial. A total of 100 patients in expected normal responders undergoing IVF/ICSI were divided into two groups: mild group (n=50) - receiving clomiphene citrate (50 - 100 mg/day for 5 days from the cycle day 2) with low doses of FSH daily (75-225IU/day from cycle day 7) and GnRH antagonist; Antagonist group (n=50).

Results: the duration of stimulation (6.98 ± 1.42 days vs 8.56 ± 1.43 days) and the total dose of FSH (1351 ± 399.14IU vs 2683 ± 590.45IU) were signiticantly less in the Mild group than in the Antagonist group (p < 0.01). The number of retrieved oocytes (11.34 ± 6 oocytes vs 11.72 ± 6.31 oocytes), fertilized oocytes (66.5% vs 73%) and clinical pregnancy rate (50 vs 42.6%) were similar in the two groups (p > 0.05).

Conclusions: Mild ovarian stimulation seems to constitute an equally effective method as compared to the Antagonist protocol in expected normal responders undergoing IVF/ICSI.

Keywords

Assisted reproductive techniques; clomiphene citrate; mild stimulation; Antagonist protocol.
PDF (Tiếng Việt)

Tạp chí sẽ lưu giữ bản quyền phân phối, giao dịch đối với tất cả các bản thảo, bản toàn văn của bài báo đăng trên hệ thống. Mọi hình thức chia sẽ, trao đổi, giao dịch các sản phẩm thuộc hệ thống xuất bản vjog.vn mà không được sự đồng ý của chúng tôi sẽ là vi phạm bản quyền

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

Most read articles by the same author(s)