Skip to main content
NCBI home page
Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology of India logoLink to Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology of India
. 2011 Jun 23;61(1):77–80. doi: 10.1007/s13224-011-0006-y

A friendly IVF protocol

Papolu Rama Devi 1,✉, Charulata Chatterjee 1, A Rajyalakshmi 1, P Navatha 1, Farah Arshiya 1
PMCID: PMC3394589

Abstract

Objective

To compare the results of a Minimally stimulated Natural cycle IVF with standard long protocol IVF.

Design

A Prospective Study Setting: Private Fertility Institute

Patient(s)

A total of 300 women were recruited of whom 150 cases [Group A] underwent IVF with minimally stimulated natural cycle and 150 controls [Group B] underwent IVF with standard long protocol, with cases and control matched for age, infertility cause, baseline FSH, ovarian reserve and no known male factor as a cause of infertility.

Result(s)

The number of oocytes retrieved was significantly lower for the minimally stimulated natural cycle regimen compared with the standard long protocol[ 4.8 ± 2.6 vs 16.2 ± 7.5 respectively]. The clinical pregnancy rate per transfer, however, was not significantly different between the two regimens [37% Vs 41%, minimally stimulated natural cycle Vs Standard long protocol, respectively].

Conclusion (s)

Minimally stimulated natural cycle IVF is a viable alternative with comparable pregnancy rates to the standard long protocol, and with added advantages of close to zero multiple pregnancy rate, zero risk of ovarian hyper stimulation syndrome, less time consuming, physically and emotionally less demanding for patients and also cost effective.

Keywords: in vitro fertilization, natural cycles, minimum stimulation, pregnancy rate

Full Text

The Full Text of this article is available as a PDF (88.5 KB).

References

  • 1.Delvigne A., Rozenberg S. Review of clinical course and treatment of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) Hum.Reprod. 2003;9(1):77–76. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmg005. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Koel S., XItskovitz-Eldor J. Severe OHSS, Yes, there is a strategy to prevent it. Hum.Reprod. 2000;15(11):2266–2267. doi: 10.1093/humrep/15.11.2266. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Macklon N.S., Fauser B.C.J.M. Regulation of follicle development and Novel approaches to ovarian stimulation for IVF. Hum.Reprod. 2000;6(4):307–312. doi: 10.1093/humupd/6.4.307. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Aboulghar M.A., Mansour R.T., Serour G.A., et al. In Vitro Fertilisation in a spontaneous cycle: a successful simple protocol. J.Obstet.Gynaecol. 1995;21:337–340. doi: 10.1111/j.1447-0756.1995.tb01020.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Bassil S., Godin P.A., Donnez J. Outcome of In Vitro Fertilisation through natural cycles in poor responders. Hum. Reprod. 1999;14:1262–1265. doi: 10.1093/humrep/14.5.1262. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Hohmann F. P., Macklon N.S., Fauser Bart.C.J. A Randomized comparison of Two ovarian Stimulation protocols with Gonadotropin Releasing Hormone [GnRH] Antagonist cotreatment for Invitro Fertilization commencing Recombinant Follicle Stimulating Hormone on cycle Day 2 or 5 with the standard long GnRH Agonist protocol. J.Clin.Endocrinol.Metab Jan. 2003;88:166–173. doi: 10.1210/jc.2002-020788. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Giorgetti C., Terriou P., Auquier P., et al. Embryo score to predict implantation after in Vitro Fertilization: based on 957 single Embryo transfers. Hum.Reprod. 1995;Sep10(9):2427–2431. doi: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a136312. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Desai Nina N., Gold Stein J., Rowland Douglas Y., et al. Morphological evaluation of human embryos and derivation of an embryo quality Scoring system specific for day-3 embryos: a preliminary study. Hum.Reprod. 2000;15(10):2190–2196. doi: 10.1093/humrep/15.10.2190. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Hesham Al-Inany, Aboulghar M, Gn RH antagonist in assisted Reproduction: a Cochrane review. Hum.Reprod 2002 (17): 874–885 [DOI] [PubMed]
  • 10.S ladkevicius, Polvilas, Campbell, Stuart Advanced Ultrasound examination in the management of Subfertility — Current opinion in obs & Gynec June. 2000;12(3):221–225. doi: 10.1097/00001703-200006000-00009. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Applebaum M. The uterine biophysical profile. ultrasound obstet Gynecol. 1995;5(1):67–68. doi: 10.1046/j.1469-0705.1995.05010067.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Knight David C., Tyle John P.P., Driscol Geoffrey L. l- Follicular flushing at oocyte retrieval: a reappraisal. Australian and New Zealand Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. 2000;41([2]):210–213. doi: 10.1111/j.1479-828x.2001.tb01212.x. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Saito H., Ishida Gabriela M., Kaneko T., et al. Application of vitrification to Human Embryo Freezing. Gynecol obstet invest. 2000;49(3):145–149. doi: 10.1159/000010236. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Desai N., AbdelHafez F., Falcone T., et al. Pregnancy and live births after transfer of embryos vitrified on day 3 at the 8 cell stage-a three year experience. Fertility and Sterility Sept. 2009;92(3):S188. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.07.1398. [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Trounson A., Anderiesz C., Jones G. Maturation of human oocytes in vitro and their developmental competence. Reproduction. 2001;121:51–75. doi: 10.1530/rep.0.1210051. [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Articles from Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology of India are provided here courtesy of Springer

RESOURCES