切换至 "中华医学电子期刊资源库"

中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版) ›› 2024, Vol. 20 ›› Issue (06) : 659 -667. doi: 10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2024.06.010

论著

抗苗勒管激素水平低不孕患者体外受精-胚胎移植妊娠结局及其周期数理论峰值分析
何梦婷1, 廖佳1, 张今成1, 撒沙威1, 徐少蓉2, 赵霞1, 马黔红1,()   
  1. 1. 四川大学华西第二医院妇产科、出生缺陷与相关妇儿疾病教育部重点实验室,成都 610041
    2. 电子科技大学医学院附属绵阳医院·绵阳市中心医院生殖中心,绵阳 621000
  • 收稿日期:2024-06-07 修回日期:2024-11-10 出版日期:2024-12-01
  • 通信作者: 马黔红
  • 基金资助:
    四川省科技厅资助项目(2020KJT0110-2020YFSY0043)四川大学“从0到1”创新研究项目(2023SCUH0017)

Pregnancy outcomes and theoretical peak number of treatment cycle of in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer in infertile women with low anti-Mullerian hormone

Mengting He1, Jia Liao1, Jincheng Zhang1, Shawei Sa1, Shaorong Xu2, Xia Zhao1, Qianhong Ma1,()   

  1. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology,Key Laboratory of Birth Defects and Related Diseases of Women and Children (Sichuan University),Ministry of Education,West China Second University Hospital,Sichuan University,Chengdu 610041,Sichuan Province,China
    2. Reproductive Medicine Center,Mianyang Central Hospital,School of Medicine,University of Electronic Science and Technology of China,Mianyang 621000,Sichuan Province,China
  • Received:2024-06-07 Revised:2024-11-10 Published:2024-12-01
  • Corresponding author: Qianhong Ma
引用本文:

何梦婷, 廖佳, 张今成, 撒沙威, 徐少蓉, 赵霞, 马黔红. 抗苗勒管激素水平低不孕患者体外受精-胚胎移植妊娠结局及其周期数理论峰值分析[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2024, 20(06): 659-667.

Mengting He, Jia Liao, Jincheng Zhang, Shawei Sa, Shaorong Xu, Xia Zhao, Qianhong Ma. Pregnancy outcomes and theoretical peak number of treatment cycle of in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer in infertile women with low anti-Mullerian hormone[J/OL]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2024, 20(06): 659-667.

目的

探讨对抗苗勒管激素(AMH)水平低不同年龄不孕女性患者采取体外受精-胚胎移植(IVF-ET)的妊娠结局及其周期数理论峰值。

方法

选择2020年1月至2023年3月于四川大学华西第二医院生殖中心接受IVF-ET/卵胞浆内单精子注射(ICSI)-ET 治疗的1 675例血清AMH水平<1.4 ng/m L不孕女性患者1 837个周期为研究对象。采用回顾性研究方法,根据患者接受IVF-ET/ICSI-ET 治疗时的年龄(以下涉及患者年龄,均为接受IVF-ET/ICSI-ET 治疗时的年龄),将其分别纳入A 组(n=733,年龄≥35 岁)与B 组(n=1 104,年龄<35 岁)。根据A、B 组患者接受IVF-ET/ICSI-ET 周期数,进一步将A、B组患者分别分为A1~A5亚组(n=518、155、34、16、10,分别为接受1、2、3、4、≥5个IVF-ET/ICSI-ET 周期治疗者),以及B1~B4亚组(n=889、171、36、8,分别为接受1、2、3、≥4个IVF-ET/ICSI-ET 周期治疗者)。采用Kruskal-Wallis H 秩和检验与χ2 检验,对A1~A5亚组、B1~B4亚组患者相关临床资料及临床妊娠率、活产率进行统计学分析。本研究遵循的程序符合2013年修订的《世界医学会赫尔辛基宣言》要求。

结果

①A1~A5亚组患者年龄与血清基础卵泡刺激素(FSH)水平、基础雌二醇水平、人绒毛膜促性腺激素(hCG)日雌二醇水平,以及hCG 日孕激素水平、促性腺激素(Gn)使用剂量、获卵数,减数分裂(M)Ⅱ期卵母细胞数分别比较,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。B1~B4亚组患者的不孕年限、AMH 水平、MⅡ期卵母细胞数分别比较,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。②A1~A5 亚组患者的临床妊娠率分别为32.4%、27.7%、17.6%、25.0%、0,活产率分别为23.4%、16.1%、11.8%、18.8%、0,A1~A5亚组临床妊娠率、活产率分别比较,差异均无统计学意义(P >0.05)。B1~B4 亚组患者的临床妊娠率分别为48.3%、45.6%、41.7%、62.5%,活产率分别为41.2%、38.6%、36.1%、50.0%,B1~B4亚组临床妊娠率、活产率分别比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。③A1亚组临床妊娠率与活产率,均显著低于B1亚组,A2亚组,则显著低于B2亚组,A3亚组显著低于B3亚组,A4+A5亚组,则显著低于B4亚组,并且差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05)。

结论

年龄<35岁AMH 水平低不孕患者临床妊娠率和活产率,均显著高于年龄≥35岁者。建议对于年龄≥35岁AMH 水平低不孕女性患者,可设置IVF-ET周期数理论峰值为4个周期,年龄<35岁者IVF-ET 周期数理论峰值为3个周期。

Objective

To explore the pregnancy outcomes of in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer (IVF-ET)and theoretical peak number of treatment cycles in infertile women with low levels of anti-Müllerian hormone(AMH)at different ages.

Methods

A total of 1 675 infertile women with serum AMH level<1.4 ng/m L who underwent IVF-ET/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI)-ET at the Reproductive Center of West China Second University Hospital,Sichuan University,from January 2020 to March 2023 were selected for this study,involving 1 837 cycles.The patients were divided into group A (n=733,age≥35 years)and group B(n=1 104,age<35 years)according to the age when receiving IVF-ET/ICSI-ET treatment by retrospective study method.According to the number of IVF-ET/ICSI cycles,group A patients were further divided into subgroup A1(n=518),subgroup A2(n=155),subgroup A3(n=34),subgroup A4(n=16),and subgroup A5(n=10),patients who received 1 to 4,and≥5 IVF-ET/ICSI-ET cycles,respectively;group B patients were further divided into subgroup B1(n=889),subgroup B2(n=171),subgroup B3(n=36),and subgroup B4(n=8),patients who received 1 to 3,and≥4 IVF-ET/ICSI-ET cycles,respectively.Kruskal-Wallis H rank sum test and chi-square test were used to compare the clinical data,clinical pregnancy rate and live birth rate of patients in subgroups A1-A5 and B1-B4.This study was in line with the requirements of WorldMedical AssociationDeclaration ofHelsinki revised in 2013.

Results

①The differences of age,serum basal follicle stimulating hormone(FSH)level,basal estradiol level,estradiol level on human chorionic gonadotropin(hCG)day,progesterone level on hCG day,gonadotropin(Gn)dosage,number of retrieved oocytes and number of meiosis(M)Ⅱstage oocytes among subgroups A1-A5 were statistically significant( P<0.05).The differences of duration of infertility,AMH levels,and number of MⅡoocytes among s ubgroups B1-B4 were statistically significant (P<0.05).②The clinical pregnancy rates in subgroups A1-A5 were 32.4%,27.7%,17.6%,25.0%,and 0,respectively,and the live birth rates were 23.4%,16.1%,11.8%,18.8%,and 0,respectively,and there were no significant differences in clinical pregnancy rates and live birth rates among subgroups A1-A5(P >0.05).The clinical pregnancy rates in subgroups B1-B4 were 48.3%,45.6%,41.7%,and 62.5%,respectively,and the live birth rates were 41.2%,38.6%,36.1%,and 50.0%,respectively,and there were no significant differences in clinical pregnancy rates and live birth rates among subgroups B1-B4(P>0.05).③The clinical pregnancy rate and live birth rate of subgroup A1 were significantly lower than those of subgroup B1,and those of subgroup A2 were significantly lower than those of subgroup B2,those of subgroup A3 were significantly lower than those of subgroup B3,and those of subgroup A4+A5 were significantly lower than those of B4 subgroup,and all the differences were statistically significant (P<0.05).

Conclusions

The clinical pregnancy rate and live birth rate of infertile women with low AMH levels aged<35 years were significantly higher than those in women aged≥35 years.It is recommended that the theoretical peak number of IVF-ET cycles for infertile women with low AMH levels aged≥35 years be set at 4 cycles,while the theoretical peak number for women aged<35 years be set at 3 cycles.

表1 A1~A5亚组患者相关临床比较[MQ1Q3)或例数(%)]
组别 周期数 年龄(岁) 不孕年限(年) BMI(kg/m2 AMH(ng/mL) 基础FSH(IU/L) 基础LH(IU/L) 基础雌二醇(pg/mL) 基础孕激素(ng/mL) hCG日LH水平(IU/L)
A1亚组 518 38.0(36.0,40.0) 3.0(1.0,6.0) 22.1(20.8,23.8) 0.9(0.6,1.1) 7.2(4.7,10.0) 3.8(2.6,5.8) 73.5(41.9,126.9) 0.6(0.4,3.4) 2.6(1.5,4.1)
A2亚组 155 38.0(36.0,41.0) 2.0(1.0,5.0) 22.5(21.0,23.9) 0.9(0.6,1.1) 8.3(6.0,11.0) 4.0(2.7,6.4) 71.2(40.4,140.6) 0.6(0.4,4.1) 2.3(1.4,3.7)
A3亚组 34 39.5(37.0,42.0) 2.5(1.0,5.3) 23.1(21.0,24.8) 0.7(0.5,1.0) 9.5(5.4,11.3) 3.3(1.8,5.0) 71.2(36.1,127.4) 0.6(0.3,5.8) 2.0(1.2,4.3)
A4亚组 16 39.0(37.0,40.8) 3.0(1.3,7.5) 23.3(20.2,25.0) 0.9(0.5,1.2) 8.4(4.6,11.1) 2.7(1.6,4.8) 161.1(95.0,590.4) 5.1(0.4,18.1) 2.3(1.4,4.1)
A5亚组 10 43.0(38.3,5.0) 2.5(0.8,3.8) 23.6(22.7,26.2) 0.7(0.3,1.0) 9.3(6.5,16.0) 4.1(2.9,8.3) 124.1(22.5,627.0) 0.7(0.3,7.0) 4.3(1.9,7.5)
统计量 H =19.10 H =2.54 H =8.98 H =3.99 H =12.38 H =8.72 H =11.79 H =3.94 H =7.46
P 0.001 0.637 0.062 0.407 0.015 0.069 0.019 0.414 0.113
组别 周期数 hCG日雌二醇水平(pg/mL) hCG日孕激素水平(ng/mL) COS方案 Gn使用剂量(IU) 获卵数(个) MⅡ期卵母细胞数(个) 双原核数(个) 优质胚胎率(%) 移植胚胎数(个)
GnRH-a长方案 GnRH 拮抗剂方案
A1亚组 518 1 117.6(685.7,1 647.2) 0.7(0.5,0.8) 20(3.9) 498(96.1) 2 550(2 175,3 075) 4.0(3.0,6.0) 3.0(2.0,5.0) 2.0(2.0,4.0) 0.3(0,0.5) 2.0(1.0,2.0)
A2亚组 155 942.0(561.4,1 358.5) 0.6(0.4,0.8) 3(1.9) 152(98.1) 2 400(1 950,2 775) 4.0(2.0,5.0) 3.0(2.0,5.0) 2.0(1.0,4.0) 0.3(0,0.6) 2.0(1.0,2.0)
A3亚组 34 1 122.4(544.0,1 412.6) 0.6(0.4,0.8) 3(8.8) 31(91.2) 2 588(1 950,3 188) 3.5(2.0,5.0) 3.0(2.0,4.3) 2.0(1.0,4.0) 0.3(0,0.5) 2.0(1.0,2.0)
A4亚组 16 1 209.1(547.5,1 650.8) 0.5(0.5,0.8) 0(0) 16(100.0) 2 900(1 875,3 412) 3.0(2.0,5.0) 2.5(2.0,4.0) 2.0(1.3,2.8) 0.3(0,1.0) 1.5(1.0,2.0)
A5亚组 10 851.8(481.0,964.2) 0.5(0.4,0.6) 0(0) 10(100.0) 2 325(2 062,2 588) 2.0(1.8,3.0) 2.0(1.8,3.0) 2.0(1.0,2.3) 0.3(0,0.5) 2.0(1.0,2.0)
统计量 H =15.17 H =10.71 χ2=3.87 H =11.53 H =11.52 H =9.95 H =4.15 H =1.18 H =0.36
P 0.004 0.030 0.332 0.021 0.021 0.041 0.386 0.882 0.985
续表2
组别 周期数 年龄(岁) 不孕年限(年) BMI(kg/m2 AMH(ng/mL) 基础FSH(IU/L) 基础LH(IU/L) 基础雌二醇(pg/mL) 基础孕激素(ng/mL) hCG日LH(IU/L)
B1亚组 889 31.0(29.0,33.0) 2.0(1.0,4.0) 21.5(20.0,23.6) 0.9(0.7,1.2) 7.3(5.3,9.6) 3.9(2.6,5.7) 66.5(39.1,120.9) 0.6(0.4,2.5) 2.0(1.2,3.1)
B2亚组 171 31.0(29.0,32.0) 3.0(2.0,5.0) 21.5(20.0,23.4) 0.9(0.6,1.1) 7.4(4.9,10.0) 3.8(2.6,5.4) 74.5(41.0,130.6) 0.6(0.4,3.8) 1.8(1.2,2.8)
B3亚组 36 31.5(29.0,33.0) 3.0(2.0,5.0) 21.1(19.9,23.7) 0.7(0.5,1.0) 6.9(5.3,10.8) 3.8(2.0,6.6) 89.7(44.7,153.4) 0.8(0.5,4.8) 2.0(1.2,2.9)
B4亚组 8 33.0(30.0,34.0) 4.5(3.0,7.0) 20.9(20.2,23.7) 0.6(0.3,1.0) 7.3(3.8,9.9) 2.7(2.2,4.0) 59.2(49.1,164.1) 0.8(0.5,7.0) 1.1(0.7,1.5)
统计量 H =2.07 H =16.58 H =0.64 H =14.35 H =0.52 H =3.35 H =4.88 H =3.48 H =5.54
P 0.558 0.001 0.886 0.002 0.914 0.341 0.181 0.324 0.136
组别 周期数 hCG日雌二醇水平(pg/mL) hCG日孕激素水平(ng/mL) COS方案 Gn使用剂量(IU) 获卵数(个) M 期卵母细胞数(个) 双原核数(个) 优质胚胎率(%) 移植胚胎数(个)
GnRH-a长方案 GnRH 拮抗剂方案
B1亚组 889 1 321.9(838.8,1 936.9) 0.7(0.5,0.9) 60(6.7) 829(93.3) 2 550(2 175,3 000) 5.0(3.0,7.0) 4.0(3.0,6.0) 3.0(2.0,4.0) 0.3(0.1,0.5) 2.0(1.0,2.0)
B2亚组 171 1 180.4(772.6,1 879.0) 0.7(0.5,0.9) 8(4.7) 163(95.3) 2 475(2 100,3 075) 5.0(3.0,7.0) 4.0(3.0,5.0) 3.0(2.0,4.0) 0.3(0,0.5) 2.0(1.0,2.0)
B3亚组 36 1 271.9(839.9,2 195.9) 0.6(0.5,0.8) 1(2.8) 35(97.2) 2 850(2 362,3 150) 4.0(3.0,7.0) 4.0(2.0,5.0) 2.5(2.0,3.8) 0.3(0,0.5) 2.0(1.0,2.0)
B4亚组 8 957.8(579.0,2 099.1) 0.6(0.3,1.0) 0(0) 8(100.0) 2 588(1 800,2 962) 2.5(2.0,7.0) 2.0(2.0,6.8) 2.0(2.0,6.0) 0.5(0.3,1.0) 2.0(2.0,2.0)
统计量 H =2.80 H =3.35 χ2=1.24 H =5.34 H =6.37 H =7.99 H =5.06 H =5.93 H =3.01
P 0.424 0.341 0.712 0.148 0.095 0.046 0.167 0.115 0.391
表3 A1~A5亚组患者妊娠结局比较[%(n/n')]
表4 B1~B4亚组患者妊娠结局比较[%(n/n')]
续表5
[1]
Njagi P,Groot W,Arsenijevic J,et al.Financial costs of assisted reproductive technology for patients in low-and middle-income countries:a systematic review[J].Hum Reprod Open,2023,2023(2):hoad007.DOI:10.1093/hropen/hoad007.
[2]
Wang Y,Fu Y,Ghazi P,et al.Prevalence of intimate partner violence against infertile women in low-income and middle-income countries:a systematic review and Metaanalysis[J].Lancet Glob Health,2022,10(6):e820-e830.DOI:10.1016/S2214-109X(22)00098-5.
[3]
Alson SSE,Bungum LJ,Giwercman A,et al.Antimüllerian hormone levels are associated with live birth rates in ART,but the predictive ability of anti-müllerian hormone is modest[J].Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol,2018,225:199-204.DOI:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2018.04.039.
[4]
Nyström A,Mörse H,Nordlöf H,et al.Anti-müllerian hormone compared with other ovarian markers after childhood cancer treatment[J].Acta Oncol,2019,58(2):218-224.DOI:10.1080/0284186X.2018.1529423.
[5]
Turkgeldi E,Yildiz S,Cekic SG,et al.Effectiveness of the flexible progestin primed ovarian stimulation protocol compared to the flexible GnRH antagonist protocol in women with decreased ovarian reserve[J].Hum Fertil(Camb),2022,25(2):306-312.DOI:10.1080/14647273.2020.1794060.
[6]
Bouet PE,Boueilh T,de la Barca JMC,et al.The cytokine profile of follicular fluid changes during ovarian ageing[J].J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod,2020,49(4):101704.DOI:10.1016/j.jogoh.2020.101704.
[7]
Pan W,Tu H,Jin L,et al.Decision analysis about the costeffectiveness of different in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer protocol under considering governments,hospitals,and patient[J].Medicine (Baltimore),2019,98(19):e15492.DOI:10.1097/MD.0000000000015492.
[8]
Braam SC,Ho VNA,Pham TD,et al.In-vitro maturation versus IVF:a cost-effectiveness analysis[J].Reprod Biomed Online,2021,42(1):143-149.DOI:10.1016/j.rbmo.2020.09.022.
[9]
Pham CT,Karnon JD,Norman RJ,et al.Cost-effectiveness modelling of IVF in couples with unexplained infertility[J].Reprod Biomed Online,2018,37(5):555-563.DOI:10.1016/j.rbmo.2018.08.024.
[10]
Ombelet W,Campo R.Affordable IVF for developing countries[J].Reprod Biomed Online,2007,15(3):257-265.DOI:10.1016/s1472-6483(10)60337-9.
[11]
Kelsey TW,Anderson RA,Wright P,et al.Data-driven assessment of the human ovarian reserve[J].Mol Hum Reprod,2012,18(2):79-87.DOI:10.1093/molehr/gar059.
[12]
Pacheco A,Cruz M,Iglesias C,et al.Very low antimüllerian hormone concentrations are not an independent predictor of embryo quality and pregnancy rate[J].Reprod Biomed Online,2018,37(1):113-119.DOI:10.1016/j.rbmo.2018.03.015.
[13]
Tal R,Seifer DB,Wantman E,et al.Antimüllerian hormone as a predictor of live birth following assisted reproduction:an analysis of 85,062 fresh and thawed cycles from the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcome Reporting System database for 2012-2013[J].Fertil Steril,2018,109(2):258-265.DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.10.021.
[14]
Helden JV,Weiskirchen R.Age-independent anti-Müllerian hormone(AMH)standard deviation scores to estimate ovarian function[J].Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol,2017,213:64-70.DOI:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2017.04.029.
[15]
Sbracia M,Farina A,Poverini R,et al.Short versus long gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogue suppression protocols for superovulation in patients>or=40 years old undergoing intracytoplasmic sperm injection[J].Fertil Steril,2005,84(3):644-648.DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.02.046.
[16]
Garcia-Velasco JA,Isaza V,Requena A,et al.High doses of gonadotrophins combined with stop versus non-stop protocol of Gn RH analogue administration in low responder IVF patients:a prospective,randomized,controlled trial[J].Hum Reprod,2000,15(11):2292-2296.DOI:10.1093/humrep/15.11.2292.
[17]
齐新宇, 孔菲, 赵捷, 等.生殖医学中的免疫学临床研究现状[J/OL].中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版),2023,19(1):1-9.DOI:10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2023.01.001.Qi XY,Kong F,Zhao J,et al.Current research progress of immunology in clinical reproductive medicine[J/OL].Chin J Obstet Gynecol Pediatr,2023,19(1):1-9.DOI:10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2023.01.001.
[18]
魏权, 张燊, 陈慧佳, 等.女性生殖道微生物群与辅助生殖技术相关性研究现状[J/OL].中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版),2023,19(2):151-155.DOI:10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2023.02.005.Wei Q,Zhang S,Chen HJ,et al.Current research progress on correlation between female reproductive tract microbiota and assisted reproductive technology[J/OL].Chin J Obstet Gynecol Pediatr,2023,19(2):151-155.DOI:10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2023.02.005.
[19]
顾娟, 孙擎擎, 胡方方, 等.子宫内膜容受性检测改善胚胎反复种植失败患者妊娠结局的临床应用[J/OL].中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版),2023,19(5):582-587.DOI:10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2023.05.012.Gu J,Sun QQ,Hu FF,et al.Clinical application of endometrial receptivity array to improve pregnancy outcomes in women with repeated embryo implantation failure[J/OL].Chin J Obstet Gynecol Pediatr,2023,19(5):582-587.DOI:10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2023.05.012.
[20]
王丽, 王月莺, 周芬, 等.促性腺激素释放激素拮抗剂对子宫内膜容受性影响的研究现状[J/OL].中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版),2023,19(6):629-635.DOI:10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2023.06.002.Wang L,Wang YY,Zhou F,et al.Current research status in effect of gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist on endometrial receptivity[J/OL].Chin J Obstet Gynecol Pediatr,2023,19(6):629-635.DOI:10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2023.06.002.
[21]
陈雨婷, 杨烨, 谢奇君, 等.女性不孕不育相关疾病患者的生殖道微生物组成异常研究现状[J/OL].中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版),2022,18(5):615-620.DOI:10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2022.05.017.Chen YT,Yang Y,Xie QJ,et al.Research advances of reproductive tract microorganism abnormality in female infertility-related diseases[J/OL].Chin J Obstet Gynecol Pediatr,2022,18(5):615-620.DOI:10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2022.05.017.
[22]
Lattes K,Brassesco M,Gomez M,et al.Low-dose growth hormone supplementation increases clinical pregnancy rate in poor responders undergoing in vitro fertilisation[J].Gynecol Endocrinol,2015,31(7):565-568.DOI:10.3109/09513590.2015.1025378.
[23]
Weall BM,Al-Samerria S,Conceicao J,et al.A direct action for GH in improvement of oocyte quality in poor-responder patients[J].Reproduction,2015,149(2):147-154.DOI:10.1530/REP-14-0494.
[24]
Dennis NA,Houghton LA,Jones GT,et al.The level of serum anti-Müllerian hormone correlates with vitamin D status in men and women but not in boys[J].J Clin Endocrinol Metab,2012,97(7):2450-2455.DOI:10.1210/jc.2012-1213.
[25]
Ciepiela P,Dulęba AJ,Kowaleczko E,et al.Vitamin D as a follicular marker of human oocyte quality and a serum marker of in vitro fertilization outcome[J].J Assist Reprod Genet,2018,35(7):1265-1276.DOI:10.1007/s10815-018-1179-4.
[1] 张镝, 于聪祥, 索静. 阴道分泌物预成酶谱4项及阴道灌洗液白细胞介素-17、-23与高危型人乳头瘤病毒持续感染致病性的相关性研究[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2024, 20(06): 652-658.
[2] 张舒沁, 陈练. 产后宫腔内妊娠物残留的诊断和临床处理[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2024, 20(05): 493-497.
[3] 石皆春, 范子玉, 邢燕. 不同筛查方法预警宫颈原位腺癌的效能[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2024, 20(05): 575-581.
[4] 唐丹, 姚晓曦, 杨博文, 薛绍龙, 李梦瑶, 韦柳杏, 郄明蓉. 双肾上腺皮质激素样激酶1对子宫内膜样腺癌患者临床特征的影响[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2024, 20(05): 582-590.
[5] 杜佳丽, 鲍睿, 乔春红, 韩伟. 中孕期宫颈功能不全孕妇经阴道紧急宫颈环扎术后不良妊娠结局预测模型构建[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2024, 20(04): 403-409.
[6] 高青卓, 康宜凡, 王治鸿. 体外受精周期中单原核胚胎的临床研究现状[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2024, 20(03): 260-265.
[7] 魏艺, 周羽西, 杨烨, 凌秀凤, 赵纯. 微小RNA对子宫内膜容受性影响的研究现状[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2024, 20(03): 266-270.
[8] 林琳, 田思萌, 于永华, 徐飞飞, 黄明莉. 干细胞及其外泌体治疗宫腔黏连的研究现状[J/OL]. 中华妇幼临床医学杂志(电子版), 2024, 20(03): 271-275.
[9] 周倩, 高劲松. 剖宫产术后瘢痕子宫再妊娠的孕期监测和风险管理[J/OL]. 中华产科急救电子杂志, 2025, 14(01): 15-19.
[10] 曾帅, 陈练. 剖宫产术后子宫瘢痕妊娠期待妊娠结局的研究进展[J/OL]. 中华产科急救电子杂志, 2025, 14(01): 31-36.
[11] 俞慧慧, 尹宗智. 妊娠期胃穿孔[J/OL]. 中华产科急救电子杂志, 2024, 13(04): 209-213.
[12] 鲁珊, 姚蕴珊, 廖色坭, 陈子恩, 张一剑, 蓝健皓, 魏薇, 刘艳杨, 陈艳红, 陈敦金. 妊娠合并急性阑尾炎100例临床研究[J/OL]. 中华产科急救电子杂志, 2024, 13(04): 214-219.
[13] 汪文雁, 郑剑兰, 朱丽慈. 体外受精-胚胎移植术后妊娠患者孕产期风险的临床研究[J/OL]. 中华产科急救电子杂志, 2024, 13(04): 220-226.
[14] 洪凡, 陈敦金, 傅洋, 梁新月, 吴毅, 王晓怡. 体外受精-胚胎移植妊娠合并前置胎盘临床研究[J/OL]. 中华产科急救电子杂志, 2024, 13(03): 176-182.
[15] 胡淼, 杜丽丽, 张丽姿, 林琳, 张瑜亮, 古士锋, 古仲嘉, 赖思莹, 梁景英, 刘雨, 黄敏珊, 黄媛媛, 黄晴晴, 罗世君, 陈敦金. 体外受精/卵胞浆内单精子注射受孕患者胎盘植入分级及围产结局的研究[J/OL]. 中华产科急救电子杂志, 2024, 13(03): 183-189.
阅读次数
全文


摘要