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
Clinical Trial
. 2005 Feb;22(2):75-9.
doi: 10.1007/s10815-005-1496-2.

Modified natural cycle using GnRH antagonist can be an optional treatment in poor responders undergoing IVF

Shai E Elizur  1 , Dilek Aslan, Adrian Shulman, Boaz Weisz, David Bider, Jehoshua Dor
Affiliations
Clinical Trial

Modified natural cycle using GnRH antagonist can be an optional treatment in poor responders undergoing IVF

Shai E Elizur et al. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2005 Feb.

Abstract

Purpose: To investigate the efficacy of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist supplementation during natural cycles in poor responders undergoing IVF-ET treatment.

Methods: We retrospectively evaluated 540 cycles of 433 suitable patients who were divided by treatment protocol into modified natural, antagonist, and long agonist groups. There were 52 modified natural cycles with GnRH antagonist supplementation, 200 stimulated cycles with GnRH antagonist, and 288 long GnRH agonist cycles. Cycle characteristics and treatment outcomes were compared between the groups.

Results: The mean number of oocytes retrieved in the modified natural group was significantly lower than in the stimulated antagonist and long agonist groups (1.4 +/- 0.5 vs. 2.3 +/- 1.1 and 2.5 +/- 1.1, respectively, p < 0.05). The respective implantation and pregnancy rates were 10% and 14.3%, 6.75% and 10.2%, and 7.4% and 10.6%. Cycle outcome and cycle properties were similar.

Conclusions: Modified natural IVF cycle with GnRH antagonist supplementation is a feasible alternative to ovarian stimulation protocols in poor responders.

PubMed Disclaimer

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Keay SD, Liversedge NH, Mahur RS, Jenkins JM. Assisted conception following poor ovarian response to gonadotrophin stimulation. Br J Obstet Gynecol. 1997;104:521–527. - PubMed
    1. Jenkins JM, Davies DW, Devonport H, Gadd SC, Watson RH, Masson GM. Comparison of ‘poor’ responders with ‘good’ responders using a standard buserelin/human menopausal gonadotrophin regime for in-vitro fertilization. Hum Reprod. 1991;6:918–921. - PubMed
    1. Mahutte NG, Arici A. Poor responders: Does the protocol make a difference? Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2002;14:275–281. - PubMed
    1. Ben-Rafael Z, Liptiz S, Bider D, Maschiach S. Ovarian hyporesponsiveness in combined gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist and menotropin therapy is associated with low serum follicle-stimulating hormone levels. Fertil Steril. 1991;55:272–275. - PubMed
    1. Ben-Rafael Z, Menashe Y, Mimon R. Limitations in the use of combined gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analog and human menopausal gonadotrophin for in vitro fertilization. In: Maschiach S, Ben-Rafael Z, Laufer N, Schenker JG, editors. Advances in Assisted Reproductive Technologies. New York: Plenum; 1990. pp. 17–30.

Publication types