| 147 | 0 | 148 |
| 下载次数 | 被引频次 | 阅读次数 |
目的 比较黄体期长方案、拮抗剂方案、卵泡期长方案3种不同促排卵方案在卵巢储备功能正常患者体外受精/卵胞浆内单精子注射-胚胎移植(IVF/ICSI-ET)助孕治疗中的临床结局。方法 回顾性分析我院生殖医学中心2019年1月至2023年12月收治的行IVF/ICSI-ET治疗的卵巢储备功能正常患者的临床资料,共552个周期。将纳入患者根据不同的促排卵方案进行分组:黄体期长方案组(A组,177个周期)、拮抗剂方案组(B组,291个周期)、卵泡期长方案组(C组,84个周期)。比较各组患者的一般资料、促排卵用药及获卵情况、胚胎发育及移植情况、妊娠结局。结果 3组患者间年龄、体质量指数(BMI)、不孕年限等一般资料比较均无显著性差异(P>0.05)。C组的促性腺激素(Gn)总量、Gn天数显著高于A、B组(P<0.01),扳机日子宫内膜厚度、卵泡刺激素(FSH)水平及获卵率显著高于A、B组(P<0.01),扳机日雌二醇(E2)水平、黄体生成素(LH)水平、直径≥14mm卵泡数则显著低于A、B组(P<0.01)。B组的第3天(D3)优胚数、囊胚形成率、优质囊胚形成率显著高于C组(P<0.05),可利用胚胎率及D3优胚率显著高于A、C两组(P<0.05)。A、B、C组分别进行了54、103、33个鲜胚移植周期,3组间移植胚胎数、鲜胚种植率、临床妊娠率及早期流产率、中重度卵巢过度刺激综合征发生率比较均无显著性差异(P>0.05)。结论 黄体期长方案、拮抗剂方案、卵泡期长方案均可用于卵巢储备功能正常患者,采用拮抗剂方案促排卵可以减少Gn总量及Gn使用天数,且可有效改善胚胎发育情况,但3种方案鲜胚移植的妊娠结局无明显差异。
Abstract:Objectives:To compare the clinical outcomes of three different controlled ovarian stimulation(COS) protocols,namely luteal phase long protocol,antagonist protocol,and follicular phase long protocol,in in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection-embryo transfer(IVF/ICSI-ET)for patients with normal ovarian reserve function.Methods:A retrospective analysis of clinical data from 552 cycles of patients with normal ovarian reserve who underwent IVF/ICSI-ET treatment at the Centre of Reproductive Medicine of Affiliated Hospital of Putian University from January 2019 to December 2023 was conducted.Patients were grouped according to different COS protocols:luteal phase long protocol group(group A,177 cycles),antagonist protocol group(group B,291 cycles),follicular phase long protocol group(group C,84 cycles).The general information,COS medication and oocyte retrieval,embryo development and embryo transfer,and pregnancy outcomes were compared among the three groups.Results:There were no significant differences in age,body mass index(BMI)and infertility duration among the three groups(P>0.05).The total amount and duration of gonadotropin(Gn)used in group C were significantly higher than those in groups A and B(P<0.01).The endometrial thickness,follicle stimulating hormone(FSH)level,and oocyte retrieval rate on human chorionic gonadotropin(HCG)day were significantly higher in group C than those in groups A and B(P<0.01).The estradiol(E2)level,luteinizing hormone(LH)level,and the number of follicles with a diameter≥14 mm on HCG day were significantly lower in group C than those in groups A and B(P<0.01).The number of D3 high-quality embryos,blastocyst formation rate,and high-quality blastocyst formation rate in group B were significantly higher than those in group C(P<0.05),and the available embryo rate and D3 high-quality embryo rate were significantly higher than those in groups A and C(P<0.05).There were 54,103 and 33 fresh embryo transfer cycles in group A,B and C respectively.There were no significant differences in the number of transferred embryos,fresh embryo implantation rate,clinical pregnancy rate,early miscarriage rate,and the incidence of moderate to severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome among 3 groups(P>0.05).Conclusions:The luteal phase long protocol,antagonist protocol,and follicular phase long protocol can all be used for patients with normal ovarian reserve function,but the use of antagonist protocol for COS can reduce the total amount and duration of Gn use,and achieve better embryo development.However,no significant differences in pregnancy outcomes were found among three protocols for fresh embryo transfer.
[1]余璐萍,刘宁,刘英.促性腺激素释放激素激动剂用于辅助生殖技术黄体支持的荟萃分析[J].中华妇产科杂志,2016,51:850-858.
[2] Vander Borght M,Wyns C.Fertility and infertility:definition and epidemiology[J].Clin Biochem,2018,62:2-10.
[3]黄荷凤,乔杰主编.实用人类辅助生殖技术[M].北京:人民卫生出版社,2018.
[4]陈彩虹,郭艺红.卵泡期长效长方案促排卵早期思考[J].生殖医学杂志,2019,28:1130-1132.
[5]李九凤,谭美华.卵泡期长方案和常规长方案在首次IVF/ICSI治疗的卵巢储备良好患者中的应用[J].妇产与遗传(电子版),2021,11:15-19.
[6]曾晓艳.卵泡期长效长方案和拮抗剂方案对卵巢正常反应患者中不同不孕因素助孕结局的分析[D].乌鲁木齐:新疆医科大学,2023.
[7]邓燕锋,磨丹,贲银,等.黄体期长方案与拮抗剂方案应用于不明原因不孕患者IVF/ICSI-ET的助孕结局比较[J].生殖医学杂志,2023,32:1615-1622.
[8]张争,蒋承芳,李玉艳,等.正常反应人群拮抗剂方案与激动剂长方案的临床特点及结局比较[J].陆军军医大学学报,2022,44:484-488.
[9]卢俏俏,王荣,邹立波,等.3种不同促排卵方案对PCOS患者子宫内膜容受性及妊娠结局的影响[J].浙江医学,2021,43:2634-2639.
[10] Liao Z,Liu C,Cai L,et al. The effect of endometrial thickness on pregnancy,maternal,and perinatal outcomes of women in fresh cycles after IVF/ICSI:a systematic review and meta-analysis[J].Front Endocrinol(Lausanne),2022,12:814648.
[11]佟亚菲,王晓红.辅助生殖技术中异常子宫内膜诊疗的中国专家共识解读[J].实用妇产科杂志,2020,36:257-260.
[12] Chen Q,Yu F,Li Y,et al.Comparative proteomics reveal negative effects of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist and antagonist on human endometrium[J].Drug Des Devel Ther,2019,13:1855-1863.
[13] Mahutte N,Hartman M,Meng L,et al.Optimal endometrial thickness in fresh and frozen-thaw in vitro fertilization cycles:an analysis of live birth rates from 96,000autologous embryo transfers[H].Fertil Steril,2022,117:792-800.
[14] Lv H,Li X,Du J,et al.Effect of endometrial thickness and embryo quality on live-birth rate of fresh IVF/ICSI cycles:a retrospective cohort study[J].Reprod Biol Endocrinol,2020,18:89.
[15]朱莉,黄建洲,罗国群,等.卵泡期长方案与黄体期长效长方案的临床效果比较[J].深圳中西医结合杂志,2019,29:180-181.
[16] Trenkic′M,Popovi c′J,Kopitovi c′V,et al.Flexible GnRH antagonist protocol vs.long GnRH agonist protocol in patients with polycystic ovary syndrome treated for IVF:comparison of comparison of clinical outcome and embryo quality[J].Ginekol Pol,2016,87:265-270.
[17]刘瑞敏.早卵泡期长方案、拮抗剂方案及黄体期短效长方案对不孕症患者子宫内膜容受性及临床妊娠的影响[J].临床医学,2024,44:36-39.
[18] Lu Y,Niu Y,Wang Y,et al.Optimal candidates to do fresh embryo transfer in those using oral contraceptive pretreatment in IVF cycles[J]. Front Physiol,2021,12:576917.
[19] Gui J,Ni Y,Liu Q,et al.Comparison of clinical effects between early follicular prolonged GnRH agonist protocol and GnRH antagonist protocol in 3310 cycles:a retrospective study[J].BMC Pregnancy Childbirth,2022,22:942.
[20] Rackow BW,Kliman HJ,Taylor HS.GnRH antagonists may affect endometrial receptivity[J].Fertil Steril,2008,89:1234-1239.
[21]虞雅,魏凯,姚秋萍,等.子宫内膜异位症合并不孕患的体外受精促排卵治疗:拮抗剂可代替激动剂吗?[J].浙江大学学报(医学版),2019,48:165-173.
[22]叶虹.控制性促排卵中过早血清孕酮升高的原因[J].生殖医学杂志,2014,23:933-936.
[23]丁晨,张红,赵淑芹.人绒毛膜促性腺激素注射日孕酮与雌二醇比值在体外受精治疗周期的价值[J].生殖医学杂志,2013,22:119-123.
[24]郝苗苗,张燕,包俊华.长效与短效GnRH-a激动剂长方案对体外受精-胚胎移植患者对卵泡期、黄体期的指标影响对比研究[J].吉林医学,2019,40:1998-2000.
[25]夏婷婷,曾克非.早卵泡期长方案与拮抗剂方案对不孕症患者子宫内膜容受性及临床妊娠的影响[J].医学信息,2023,36:140-143.
[26]潘丹,杨杰,王婷,等.比较卵泡期长效长方案和拮抗剂方案在不孕伴肥胖人群中的应用效果[J].生殖医学杂志,2024,33:330-336.
[27]马超,龚琦,魏蕾,等.卵泡期长效长方案与拮抗剂方案在卵巢正常反应人群中临床效果比较[J].湖北医药学院学报,2021,40:578-583.
[28]马紫玮,南燕,王慧,等.早卵泡期长效长方案与拮抗剂方案在卵巢正常反应患者中的应用效果比较[J].新乡医学院学报,2022,39:1041-1046.
[29]许定飞.GnRH拮抗剂方案影响人子宫内膜容受性的作用机制研究[D].南昌:南昌大学,2022.
[30]吕小晶,冯文娟,王凯,等.两种超促排卵方案对卵巢正常反应病人体外受精-胚胎移植/卵胞浆内单精子注射的效果比较[J].安徽医药,2023,27:1380-1385.
基本信息:
中图分类号:R714.8
引用信息:
[1]黄琼英,彭进强.3种不同促排卵方案应用于卵巢储备功能正常患者的临床结局比较[J].生殖医学杂志,2025,34(10):1336-1342.
2025-02-12
2025
2025-06-02
2025-09-14
2025
1
2025-10-15
2025-10-15