Skip to main content
. 2014 Dec 3;32(2):305–312. doi: 10.1007/s10815-014-0392-z

Table 2.

The comparison of the IVM results from the follicular and luteal phases

Phase No. Total MII MI GV Deg. SRa (%) MRb (%)
Follicular 1 17 7 4 2 4 76.5 53.8
3 12 1 4 4 3 75 11.1
4 5 1 4 0 0 100 20
5 4 3 0 0 1 75 100
6 19 4 6 3 6 68.4 30.8
7 2 0 2 0 0 100 0
9 7 3 2 0 2 71.4 60
12 0 - - - - - -
15 0 - - - - - -
16 14 6 3 2 3 78.6 54.5
21 9 6 0 2 1 88.9 75
22 10 3 3 1 3 70 42.9
23 2 1 0 0 1 50 100
25 9 7 1 1 0 100 77.8
26 17 9 3 2 3 82.4 64.3
mean 8.5(±6.3) 3.9(±2.8) 2.5(±1.9) 1.3(±1.3) 2.1(±1.8) 79.7(±14.6) 53.1(±31.6)
No. Total MII MI GV Deg. SR (%) MII rate (%)
Luteal 2 11 4 5 1 1 90.9 40.0
8 7 4 2 1 0 100 57.1
10 4 2 1 0 1 75 66.7
13 26 13 7 1 5 80.8 61.9
14 9 2 3 1 3 66.7 33.3
17 6 3 2 0 1 83.3 60
18 2 0 0 0 2 0 -
19 10 2 5 1 2 80 25
24 5 2 1 0 2 60 66.7
27 8 0 5 0 3 62.5 0
Mean 8.8(±6.6) 3.2(±3.7) 3.1(±2.3) 0.5(±0.5) 2(±1.4) 69.9(±27.5) 45.6(±22.9)
P value 0.99 0.37 0.53 0.16 0.98 0.51 0.66

Values are expressed mean ± SD

No. patient number, Deg. degeneration oocyte, SR survival rate, MR maturation rate

asurvival rate = total oocytes extracted minus the number of degenerated oocytes / total oocytes extracted)

bmaturation rate = MIIoocytes / total extracted oocytes minus the degenerated oocytes)

Qualitative data were expressed as numbers and compared using the non-parametric Mann-Whitney’s U test. (P < 0.05)