Servicio de Medicina de la Reproducción, Department of Obstetrics, Gynaecology and Reproduction, Hospital Universitario Dexeus, Calle Sabino Arana, 5-19 - Planta 1, Barcelona 08028, Spain.
Servicio de Medicina de la Reproducción, Department of Obstetrics, Gynaecology and Reproduction, Hospital Universitario Dexeus, Calle Sabino Arana, 5-19 - Planta 1, Barcelona 08028, Spain.
Reprod Biomed Online. 2020 May;40(5):661-667. doi: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2020.01.016. Epub 2020 Jan 25.
Is live birth rate among recipients of donated oocytes different depending on mode of treatment for endogenous LH suppression administered to oocyte donors during ovarian stimulation?
A retrospective cohort study of recipients of freshly donated oocytes from oocyte donors who underwent ovarian stimulation with gonadotrophins at a private, university-based infertility clinic between January 2017 and March 2018. For endogenous LH suppression, oocyte donors received daily injections of gonadotrophin releasing hormone antagonist ganirelix (GNR) or daily oral 75 µg desogestrel (DSG) until triggering with 0.2 mg of triptorelin. Three hundred recipient cycles of freshly donated oocytes were included: 154 from oocyte donor DSG cycles and 146 from oocyte donor GNR cycles.
Comparison of basal characteristics of oocyte donors showed no differences in mean age, anti-Müllerian hormone levels and body mass index between the oocyte donor DSG p and oocyte donor GNR groups, respectively. Similarly, no differences were observed among mean age of recipients and body mass index. Out of 300 fresh embryo transfers, 190 clinical pregnancies (63.3%) and 150 live births (50%) were achieved. Per embryo transfer clinical pregnancy rate was 66.2% in the DSG recipient group and 60.3% in the GNR recipient group (P = 0.338). Live birth rates were not significantly different between both groups (48.7% among DSG recipient group and 51.4% among GNR recipient group; P = 0.729).
Live birth rate among recipients of donated oocytes does not differ depending on the mode of treatment for endogenous LH suppression administered to the oocyte donors during ovarian stimulation. This information is reassuring and will be of interest to teams using these kinds of protocols, although further research is needed.
接受捐赠卵的患者的活产率是否因卵巢刺激过程中给予供卵者的内源性 LH 抑制的治疗方式而有所不同？
这是一项回顾性队列研究，纳入了 2017 年 1 月至 2018 年 3 月在一家私立大学附属不孕不育诊所接受促性腺激素卵巢刺激的供卵者新鲜捐赠卵的接受者。对于内源性 LH 抑制，供卵者接受每日注射促性腺激素释放激素拮抗剂 GnRH 拮抗剂（ganirelix，GNR）或每日口服 75µg 去氧孕烯（desogestrel，DSG），直至用 0.2mg 曲普瑞林触发。纳入了 300 个新鲜捐赠卵的受体周期：154 个来自 DSG 供卵周期，146 个来自 GNR 供卵周期。
供卵者的基本特征比较显示，DSG 供卵者组和 GNR 供卵者组的平均年龄、抗苗勒氏管激素水平和体重指数均无差异。同样，受体的平均年龄和体重指数也无差异。在 300 个新鲜胚胎移植中，获得了 190 例临床妊娠（63.3%）和 150 例活产（50%）。DSG 受体组的每个胚胎移植临床妊娠率为 66.2%，GNR 受体组为 60.3%（P=0.338）。两组的活产率无显著差异（DSG 受体组为 48.7%，GNR 受体组为 51.4%；P=0.729）。
接受捐赠卵的患者的活产率与卵巢刺激过程中给予供卵者的内源性 LH 抑制的治疗方式无关。这一信息令人安心，并且对于使用这些方案的团队将具有重要意义，尽管还需要进一步的研究。
