Comparison of clinical outcomes between different down-regulation protocols in in vitro fertilization-embryo transplantation patients

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.1673-5250.2018.03.011

Objective

To compare the clinical outcomes in pregnancy between the infertility patients receiving long-term protocol and ultra-long-term down-regulation protocol who underwent in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer (IVF-ET) .

Methods

From July 1, 2012 to January 31, 2017, a total of 386 infertility patients who underwent IVF-ET or intracytoplasmic sperm injection-embryo transfer (ICSI-ET) in Department of Reproductive Medicine, Jining No.1 People′s Hospital were selected as research subjects. According to the different down-regulation protocols they received, they were divided into long-term down-regulation protocol group (n=249), and ultra-long-term down-regulation protocol group (n=137). In long-term down-regulation protocol group and ultra-long-term down-regulation protocol group, there were 192 cases and 30 cases of patients ≤30 years old, 21 cases and 68 cases of patients >30-35 years old, 36 cases and 39 cases of patients ≥35 years old, respectively. The following items of all subjects were collected, including age, body mass index (BMI), the dosage of gonadotropins (Gn), the duration of Gn treatment, the number of embryos transferred, the number of oocytes retrieved, and rates of biochemical pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, spontaneous miscarriage and ectopic pregnancy. The age, BMI, the dose of Gn, and the number of embryos transferred between two groups with different age stages were compared by independent-samples t test, respectively. The number of oocytes retrieved between two groups with different age stages were compared by rank sum test, respectively. The rates of biochemical pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, spontaneous miscarriage and ectopic pregnancy between two groups with different age stages were compared by chi-square test, respectively.

Results

①There were no statistical differences between two groups with different age stages in the terms of age and BMI, respectively (P>0.05). ②Among infertility patients ≥30 years old, the dosage of Gn, duration of Gn treatment and the number of embryos transferred in ultra-long-term down-regulation protocol group were (3 290.0±1 113.6 ) g, (12.3±2.3) d, and (2.1±0.3), respectively, which were all greater or longer than those in long-term down-regulation protocol group [(1 848.2±684.8 ) g, (9.7±1.9) d, and (2.0±0.2)], and all the differences were statistically significant (t=5.489, P<0.001; t=6.254, P<0.001; t=3.072, P=0.016). The spontaneous miscarriage rate of patients in ultra-long-term down-regulation protocol group was 3.3%, which was significantly lower than that of long-term down-regulation protocol group 20.6% (χ²=4.969, P=0.026). ③Among infertility patients >30-35 years old, the dosage of Gn, duration of Gn treatment of patients in ultra-long-term down-regulation protocol group were (3 800.0±1 310.5) g and (12.7±2.9) d, respectively, which were greater or longer than those in long-term down-regulation protocol group [(2 149.0±603.8) g, (9.5±1.9) d], and both the differences were statistically significant (t=5.632, 4.991; P<0.001). ④Among infertility patients ≥35 years old, the dosage of Gn and duration of Gn treatment of patients in ultra-long-term down-regulation protocol group were (3 991.7±944.5) g and (12.4±2.9) d, respectively, which were greater or longer than those in long-term down-regulation protocol [(2 701.7±987.3) g, (9.7±1.8) d], while the number of oocytes retrieved of patients in ultra-long-term down-regulation protocol group was 7 (4-9), which was significantly lower than those in long-term down-regulation protocol group [10 (8-15)], and all the differences were statistically significant (t=7.226, t=4.872, Z=5.121; P<0.001).

Conclusions

Infertility patients ≤ 30 years old are recommended to be treated with ultra-long-term down-regulation protocol for IVF-ET treatment. There is no obvious advantage for patients >30-35 years old to apply ultra-long-term down-regulation protocol, so it is suggested to apply long-term down-regulation protocol. Patients ≥ 35 years old are suggested to use ultra-long-term down-regulation protocol for IVF-ET treatment carefully.

Key words: Fertilization in vitro, Embryo transfer, Sperm injections, intracytoplasmic, Gonadotropins, Abortion, spontaneous, Female

表1 年龄≤30岁的2组受试者一般临床资料及妊娠结局比较

组别	例数	年龄(岁，±s)	BMI(kg/m²，±s)	Gn使用剂量(g，±s)	Gn使用时间(d，±s)	获卵数[个，M(P₂₅～P₇₅)]
长方案组	192	26.6±2.4	22.9±3.9	1 848.2±684.8	9.7±1.9	13(9～17)
超长方案组	30	27.1±2.2	22.7±3.8	3 290.0±1 113.6	12.3±2.3	11(7～16)
检验值	?	t＝1.023	t＝0.922	t＝5.489	t＝6.254	Z＝0.982
P值	?	0.336	0.821	<0.001	<0.001	0.110
组别	例数	移植胚胎数(个，±s)	生化妊娠[% (n/n′)]	临床妊娠[% (n/n′)]	自然流产[% (n/n′)]	异位妊娠[% (n/n′)]
长方案组	192	2.0±0.2	58.3(112/192)	53.1(102/192)	20.6(21/102)	1.0(1/102)
超长方案组	30	2.1±0.3	53.3(16/30)	50.0(15/30)	3.3(1/30)	0(0/30)
检验值	?	t＝3.072	χ²＝0.266	χ²＝0.102	χ²＝4.969	—
P值	?	0.016	0.606	0.750	0.026	1.000

表1 年龄≤30岁的2组受试者一般临床资料及妊娠结局比较

组别	例数	年龄(岁，±s)	BMI(kg/m²，±s)	Gn使用剂量(g，±s)	Gn使用时间(d，±s)	获卵数[个，M(P₂₅～P₇₅)]
长方案组	192	26.6±2.4	22.9±3.9	1 848.2±684.8	9.7±1.9	13(9～17)
超长方案组	30	27.1±2.2	22.7±3.8	3 290.0±1 113.6	12.3±2.3	11(7～16)
检验值	?	t＝1.023	t＝0.922	t＝5.489	t＝6.254	Z＝0.982
P值	?	0.336	0.821	<0.001	<0.001	0.110
组别	例数	移植胚胎数(个，±s)	生化妊娠[% (n/n′)]	临床妊娠[% (n/n′)]	自然流产[% (n/n′)]	异位妊娠[% (n/n′)]
长方案组	192	2.0±0.2	58.3(112/192)	53.1(102/192)	20.6(21/102)	1.0(1/102)
超长方案组	30	2.1±0.3	53.3(16/30)	50.0(15/30)	3.3(1/30)	0(0/30)
检验值	?	t＝3.072	χ²＝0.266	χ²＝0.102	χ²＝4.969	—
P值	?	0.016	0.606	0.750	0.026	1.000

表2 年龄>30～35岁的2组受试者一般临床资料及妊娠结局比较

组别	例数	年龄(岁，±s)	BMI(kg/m²，±s)	Gn使用剂量(g，±s)	Gn使用时间(d，±s)	获卵数[个，M(P₂₅～P₇₅)]
长方案组	21	32.5±1.0	23.7±4.4	2 149.0±603.8	9.5±1.9	12(8～16)
超长方案组	68	32.9±1.0	24.0±4.5	3 800.0±1 310.5	12.7±2.9	9(6～13)
检验值	?	t＝1.632	t＝0.937	t＝5.632	t＝4.991	Z＝0.753
P值	?	0.100	0.810	<0.001	<0.001	0.097
组别	例数	移植胚胎数(个，±s)	生化妊娠[% (n/n′)]	临床妊娠[% (n/n′)]	自然流产[% ( n/n′)]
长方案组	21	1.9±0.3	71.4(15/21)	57.1(12/21)	16.3(7/43)
超长方案组	68	1.9±0.4	67.7(46/68)	63.2(43/68)	8.3(1/12)
检验值	?	t＝0.822	χ²＝0.106	χ²＝0.252	χ²＝0.052
P值	?	0.080	0.744	0.615	0.820

表2 年龄>30～35岁的2组受试者一般临床资料及妊娠结局比较

组别	例数	年龄(岁，±s)	BMI(kg/m²，±s)	Gn使用剂量(g，±s)	Gn使用时间(d，±s)	获卵数[个，M(P₂₅～P₇₅)]
长方案组	21	32.5±1.0	23.7±4.4	2 149.0±603.8	9.5±1.9	12(8～16)
超长方案组	68	32.9±1.0	24.0±4.5	3 800.0±1 310.5	12.7±2.9	9(6～13)
检验值	?	t＝1.632	t＝0.937	t＝5.632	t＝4.991	Z＝0.753
P值	?	0.100	0.810	<0.001	<0.001	0.097
组别	例数	移植胚胎数(个，±s)	生化妊娠[% (n/n′)]	临床妊娠[% (n/n′)]	自然流产[% ( n/n′)]
长方案组	21	1.9±0.3	71.4(15/21)	57.1(12/21)	16.3(7/43)
超长方案组	68	1.9±0.4	67.7(46/68)	63.2(43/68)	8.3(1/12)
检验值	?	t＝0.822	χ²＝0.106	χ²＝0.252	χ²＝0.052
P值	?	0.080	0.744	0.615	0.820

表3 年龄≥35岁的2组受试者一般临床资料及妊娠结局比较

组别	例数	年龄(岁，±s)	BMI(kg/m²，±s)	Gn使用剂量(g，±s)	Gn使用时间(d，±s)	获卵数[个，M(P₂₅～P₇₅)]
长方案组	36	37.3±2.3	23.7±2.2	2 701.7±987.3	9.7±1.8	10(8～15)
超长方案组	39	38.6±2.1	23.5±2.8	3 991.7±944.5	12.4±2.9	7(4～9)
检验值	?	t＝1.924	t＝0.944	t＝7.226	t＝4.872	Z＝5.121
P值	?	0.061	0.802	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001
组别	例数	移植胚胎数(个，±s)	生化妊娠[% (n/n′)]	临床妊娠[% (n/n′)]	自然流产[% (n/n′)]	异位妊娠[% (n/n′)]
长方案组	36	2.3±0.5	55.6(20/36)	41.7(15/36)	20.2(3/15)	13.3(2/15)
超长方案组	39	2.3±0.6	43.6(17/39)	41.0(16/39)	25.0(4/16)	0(0/16)
检验值	?	t＝0.739	χ²＝1.072	χ²＝0.003	χ²＝0.000^a	—
P值	?	0.110	0.300	0.955	1.000	0.226

表3 年龄≥35岁的2组受试者一般临床资料及妊娠结局比较

组别	例数	年龄(岁，±s)	BMI(kg/m²，±s)	Gn使用剂量(g，±s)	Gn使用时间(d，±s)	获卵数[个，M(P₂₅～P₇₅)]
长方案组	36	37.3±2.3	23.7±2.2	2 701.7±987.3	9.7±1.8	10(8～15)
超长方案组	39	38.6±2.1	23.5±2.8	3 991.7±944.5	12.4±2.9	7(4～9)
检验值	?	t＝1.924	t＝0.944	t＝7.226	t＝4.872	Z＝5.121
P值	?	0.061	0.802	<0.001	<0.001	<0.001
组别	例数	移植胚胎数(个，±s)	生化妊娠[% (n/n′)]	临床妊娠[% (n/n′)]	自然流产[% (n/n′)]	异位妊娠[% (n/n′)]
长方案组	36	2.3±0.5	55.6(20/36)	41.7(15/36)	20.2(3/15)	13.3(2/15)
超长方案组	39	2.3±0.6	43.6(17/39)	41.0(16/39)	25.0(4/16)	0(0/16)
检验值	?	t＝0.739	χ²＝1.072	χ²＝0.003	χ²＝0.000^a	—
P值	?	0.110	0.300	0.955	1.000	0.226

[1]	Kumar P, Sharma A. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogs: understanding advantages and limitations [J]. J Hum Reprod Sci, 2014, 7(3): 170-174.
[2]	马晓玲，秦天生，张瑞，等．超长方案在子宫内膜异位症患者体外受精-胚胎移植中的价值探讨 [J]．生殖医学杂志，2013，22(7)：536-539.
[3]	周黎明，郑娟，孙亦婷，等．醋酸亮丙瑞林微球治疗子宫腺肌病合并不孕的临床疗效观察 [J]. 中华妇产科杂志，2013, 48(5): 334-337.
[4]	李游，伍琼芳，易迎春．超长方案降调节对多囊卵巢综合症不孕患者行IVF结局的影响 [J]．江西医药，2014，49(2)：117-120.
[5]	García-Velasco JA, Kupesic S, Pellicer A, et al. Follicular and endocrine profiles associated with different GnRH-antagonist regimens: a randomized controlled trial [J]. Reprod Biomed Online, 2012, 24(2): 153-162.
[6]	罗克莉，蔡素芬，林戈，等．改良超长方案在卵巢储备功能低下高龄患者中的应用[J]．生殖与避孕，2013，33(1)：11-15.
[7]	李元，罗克莉，唐奕，等．改良超长方案改善卵巢低反应患者IVF/ICSI妊娠结局：一项自身对照研究 [J]. 生殖医学杂志，2015，24(10)：815-820.
[8]	Brinsden PR.体外受精与辅助生殖——Bourn Hall诊所临床实践与实验室操作指南[M]．全松，陈雷宁，译.3版. 北京：人民卫生出版社，2009：233-234.
[9]	匡延平．轻刺激——从克罗米芬到来曲唑 [J]．生殖医学杂志，2008，17(6)：431-434.
[10]	陈艳，贾小丽. 低剂量降调节改良超长方案在重复周期IVF/ICSI-ET患者中的应用 [J]. 中国妇幼保健，2014，29(33)：5450-5452.
[11]	何亚琼，王杨，路瑶，等. 微量GnRH-a长方案和短方案在≥35岁不孕患者IVF/ICSI-ET中临床结局的比较 [J]. 生殖与避孕，2015，35(1)：15-21.
[12]	Gomes LM, Canha Ados S, Dzik A, et al. The age as a predictive factor in in vitro fertilization cycles [J]. Rev Bras Ginecol Obstet, 2009, 31(5): 230-234.
[13]	Scheffer JB, Scheffer BB, de Carvalho RF, et al. Age as a predictor of embryo quality regardless of the quantitative ovarian response [J]. Int J Fertil Steril, 2017, 11(1): 40-46.
[14]	Chen XZ, Wen L, Rui YY, et al. Long-term survival outcomes of laparoscopic versus open gastrectomy for gastric cancer: a systematic review and Meta-analysis [J]. Medicine (Baltimore), 2015, 94(4): e454.
[15]	Evans J, Salamonsen LA. Too much of a good thing? Experimental evidence suggests prolonged exposure to hCG is detrimental to endometrial receptivity [J]. Hum Reprod, 2013, 28(6): 1610-1619.
[16]	张俊文，蔡嘉力，刘兰兰，等．改良长方案致卵巢低反应发生率及其助孕结局 [J]．生殖与避孕，2013，33(9)：610-614.
[17]	李洁，谭真，任姿，等．可控制性卵巢刺激治疗中促性腺激素释放激素激动剂降调节与卵巢过度抑制 [J]．生殖医学杂志，2007，16(5)：306-308.
[18]	王春哓，祁秀娟，刘海宁，等．亮丙瑞林和曲普瑞林对体外受精-胚胎移植效果比较[J]．齐鲁医学杂志，2014，29(2)：112-114.
[19]	王多静，李霞，腊晓琳．国产醋酸亮丙瑞林在体外受精-胚胎移植超长方案的应用[J]．生殖医学杂志，2015，24(2)：115-119.
[20]	Lebovic DI, Mueller MD, Taylor RN. Immunobiology of endometriosis [J]. Fertil Steril, 2001, 75(1): 1-10.
[21]	Kuczyński W, Dhont M, Grygoruk C, et al. Rescue ICSI of unfertilized oocytes after IVF [J]. Hum Reprod, 2002, 17(9): 2423-2427.
[22]	Bosch E, Labarta E, Kolibianakis E, et al. Regimen of ovarian stimulation affects oocyte and therefore embryo quality [J]. Fertil Steril, 2016, 105(3): 560-570.
[23]	Yilmaz N, Yilmaz S, Inal H, et al. Is there a detrimental effect of higher gonadotrophin dose on clinical pregnancy rate in normo-responders undergoing ART with long protocol? [J]. Arch Gynecol Obstet, 2013, 287(5): 1039-1044.
[24]	Wintner EM, Hershko-Klement A, Tzadikevitch K, et al. Does the transfer of a poor quality embryo together with a good quality embryo affect the in vitro fertilization (IVF) outcome [J]. J Ovarian Res, 2017, 10(1): 2.
[25]	Fanchin R, Schonä uer LM, Cunha-Filho JS, et al. Coordination of antral follicle growth: basis for innovative concepts of controlled ovarian hyperstimulation [J]. Semin Reprod Med, 2005, 23(4): 354-362.
[26]	van Tilborg TC, Broekmans FJM, Dólleman M, et al. Individualized follicle-stimulating hormone dosing and in vitro fertilization outcome in agonist downregulated cycles: a systematic review [J]. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand, 2016, 95(12): 1333-1344.

[1]	Xin Chen, Sha Hu, Hong Luo. Ultrasonographic features and diagnostic value of obstructive cervical dysplasia[J]. Chinese Journal of Medical Ultrasound (Electronic Edition), 2022, 19(10): 1052-1057.
[2]	Minrong Ma, Cong Li, Qin Zhou. Current research status of treatment of cervical cancer[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2023, 19(05): 497-504.
[3]	Changsheng Lin, Jun Zhan, Xue Xiao. Genetic testing and precision molecular targeted therapy in diagnosis and treatment of epithelial ovarian caner[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2023, 19(05): 505-510.
[4]	Juan Gu, Qingqing Sun, Fangfang Hu, Yijuan Cao, Yujuan Qi. Clinical application of endometrial receptivity array to improve pregnancy outcomes in women with repeated embryo implantation failure[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2023, 19(05): 582-587.
[5]	Wenrong Dai, Lijuan Zhao, Zhihui Li. Research progress of influence of extracellular vesicles on embryo implantation[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2023, 19(05): 616-620.
[6]	Dongjie Zhou, Min Jiang, Hairui Fan, Lingling Gao, Xiang Kong, Dan Lu, Liping Wang. Current research progress on non-coding RNA in follicular development and maturation[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2023, 19(04): 387-393.
[7]	Huizhu Chen, Yingkun Guo, Xinrong Wang, Gang Ning, Xijian Chen. Current research status on the " dualistic model" of epithelial ovarian cancer and its molecular biology[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2023, 19(04): 394-402.
[8]	Chunying Han, Tingting Wang, Yanyan Li, Jinxia Piao. Current research status on predictors of lymphatic vascular invasion in patients with endometrial carcinoma[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2023, 19(04): 403-409.
[9]	Zhaomin Zeng, Haiyan Yu. Clinical cognition of superfemale syndrome[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2023, 19(02): 145-150.
[10]	Quan Wei, Shen Zhang, Huijia Chen, Heng Zou, Lina Hu. Current research progress on correlation between female reproductive tract microbiota and assisted reproductive technology[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2023, 19(02): 151-155.
[11]	Yanyan Liu, Xi Tan, Xue Peng. Pregnancy complicated with papillary urothelial neoplasms of low malignant potential: a case report and literature review[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2023, 19(02): 212-218.
[12]	Ouchan Hu, Zhongying Huang. Current status and outlook of research in treatment of unexplained recurrent spontaneous abortion[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2023, 19(01): 16-22.
[13]	Lin You, Zhenwei Cai, Jing Qiao. Clinical research progress on Turner syndrome[J]. Chinese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Pediatrics(Electronic Edition), 2022, 18(06): 634-639.
[14]	Lifei Tian, Jianfeng Yao, Le Zhang, Yaqi Qu, Xiaolong Zhang, Pan Quan, Likun Yan. Application of deperitonealization of the round ligament in female inguinal hernia repair[J]. Chinese Journal of Hernia and Abdominal Wall Surgery(Electronic Edition), 2023, 17(01): 56-59.
[15]	Liping Wu, Ningning Du, Jing Jiang, Jingjing Liu, Qiong Xing, Yunxia Cao. Effect of natural cycle freeze-thaw embryo transfer on pregnancy outcome in assisted reproductive technology[J]. Chinese Journal of Clinicians(Electronic Edition), 2023, 17(01): 54-57.

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export