- Batool Hossein Rashidi
 - - Vali-e- Asar Reproductive Health Research Center,Tehran Medical Sciences University, Tehran, Iran
- Leila Aghaghazvini
- - Vali-e- Asar Reproductive Health Research Center,Tehran Medical Sciences University, Tehran, Iran
- Roghayeh Moghimi
- - Vali-e- Asar Reproductive Health Research Center,Tehran Medical Sciences University, Tehran, Iran
Received: 4/1/2002 Accepted: 4/1/2002 - Publisher : Avicenna Research Institute |
| Related Articles |
|
| Other Format |
|
|
|
Abstract
Infertility treatment has reached to prominent improvements in recent years and new methods of ART have important role in these improvements. Several factors are considered for patient’s evaluation in these methods. For this purpose, we decided to evaluate the relation between third day LH with ovarian response in IVF cycles. This is a prospective study and 78 IVF candidates were chosen base on study requirements and were divided into two groups according to third day LH level. First group was consisted of 14 women with LH<3 miu l, and second group was consisted of 64 women with lh>3. Patients had gone under treatment cycle base on long treatment plan with agonist gonadotropins and human gonadotropins. Then two groups were compared for number of follicle, number of retrieved oocyte, duration of ovarian stimulation, number of used gonadotropin ampules, number of resulted embryos, cancellation rate of cycles and finally pregnancy rate. Base on results and considering P value<0.05 , significant differences were not observed between the two groups in third day lh, patient age, kind of infertility, cause of infertility and duration of infertility. in other hand, two groups did not show any significance difference in ovarian response, number of follicle and retrieved oocyte, stimulation duration, number of used ampules, cancellation rate of cycles and pregnancy rate. this reveals third day lh level is not associated with success rate in ivf cycles.< pan>
Keywords:
Luteinizing Hormone (LH), Ovarian response, Ovarian stimulation, IVF, Infertility To cite this article:References
- Berek J.S., Adashi E.y. Infertility. Novak’s gyneglogy, Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore. Philadelphia, London Paris. 1996.
- Kenneth J.R., Ross S. Evaluation of the infertile couple, infertility treatment. Kistner’s gynecology principles and practice. Mosby, St Louis, Baltimore, Boston, Philadelphia. 1995; PP 278- 324.
- Speroff l., Glass R.H., Kase N.G., et al. Clinical gynecologic endocrinology and infertility regulation of menstrual cycles. Female and male infertility. Assist Reprod. Williams and Wilkins, Baltimore. Margland. 1998; PP 809- 947.
- Navot D., Rosen W. Z., Margalith E.J. Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome in novel reproductive technologies: prevention and treatment. Fertil Steril. 1987; 58: 249- 56.
- Muasher S. J. Controversies in assisted reproduction treatment of low responders. J Assist Reprod Genet. 1993; 10: 111- 2.
- Winslow K.L., Toner J.P., Brzyski R.G. The gonadotropine agoinst stimulation test sensitive predictor of performance in the IVF cycle. Fertil Steril. 1991; 56 (1): 711.
- Muasher S. J., Oehninger S., Simonettis S., et al. The value of basal and/or stimulate serum gonadotrophin levels in prediction of stimulation response and IVF outcome. Fertil Steril. 1988; 50: 298- 307.
- Noci I., Biagiotti R., Maggi M., et al. Low day 3 LH values are predictive of reduced response to ovarian stimulation. Hum Reprod. 1998; 13 (3): 531-4.
- Loumaye E., Billion J. M. Prediction of individual response to controlled ovarian hyperstimulation by means of a clomiphene citrate challenge test. Fertil Steril. 1990; 53: 295- 301.
- Stanger J. Reduced IVF of human oocyte from patient with raised LH level during the follicular phase. Br J Obs Gyn. 1985; 92: 385- 93.
- Scott R.T., Hofmans G.G. Prognostic assessment of ovarian reserve. Fertil Steril.1995; 63: 1- 11.