Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 1999 Sep;16(8):416-20.
doi: 10.1023/a:1020565408018.

Controlled ovarian hyperstimulation adversely affects implantation following in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer

J H Check  1 , J K Choe, D Katsoff, D Summers-Chase, C Wilson
Affiliations

Controlled ovarian hyperstimulation adversely affects implantation following in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer

J H Check et al. J Assist Reprod Genet. 1999 Sep.

Abstract

Purpose: Our purpose was to determine if controlled ovarian hyperstimulation adversely affects implantation.

Methods: A retrospective comparison of pregnancy rates (PRs) and implantation rates was made between oocyte recipients versus their donors, who shared half of the retrieved oocytes, and regular patients undergoing in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer (IVF-ET) who were not sharing eggs.

Results: Higher implantation rates (39.0 vs 22.5%; P < 0.05) were found in recipients compared to donors in the stimulated cycle. However, no differences were seen in PRs or implantation rates in frozen ET cycles. The data for standard IVF patients were almost-identical to those for donors.

Conclusions: Superior implantation rates and PRs in oocyte recipients versus donors were not related to better oocyte quality for recipients because of egg sharing or to a better uterine environment because of similar results with frozen ET in all three groups. An adverse effect of the hyperstimulation regimen best explains the difference.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Rosenwaks Z. Donor eggs: Their application in modern reproductive technologies. Fertil Steril. 1987;47:895–909. - PubMed
    1. Serhal PR, Craft LL. Ovum donation—A simplified approach. Fertil Steril. 1987;48:265–269. - PubMed
    1. Ben-Nun I, Ghetler Y, Gruber A, Jaffe R, Fejgin M. Egg donation in an in vitro fertilization program: An alternative approach to cycle synchronization and timing of embryo transfer. Fertil Steril. 1989;52:683–687. - PubMed
    1. Devroey P, Smith J, Camus M, Sisanto A, Deschacht J, Van Waesberghe L, Van Steirteghem AC. Synchronization of donor's and recipient's cycles with GnRH analogues in an oocyte donation program. Hum Reprod. 1989;4:270–274. - PubMed
    1. Frydman R, Letur-Konirsch H, de Ziegler D, Bydlowski M, Raoul-Duval A, Selva J. A protocol for satisfying the ethical issues raised by oocyte donation: the free, anonymous and fertile donors. Fertil Steril. 1990;53:666–672. - PubMed