Source
Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Monash University, Clayton, Victoria, 3168, Australia. beverley.vollenhoven@med.monash.edu.au
Abstract
PURPOSE:
To determine whether there is a superior treatment modality for 'poor' responders.
METHOD:
Retrospective analysis of three stimulation regimens, with patients stratified based on age, stimulation regime and response in previous cycles ("poor' responder or "non poor" responder). Fertilisation, embryo utilisation and clinical pregnancy rates were assessed. There were a total of 1,608 cycles in the 'poor' responder and 8,489 cycles in the 'non poor' responder groups.
RESULTS:
In 'poor' responders there was no significant difference in fertilisation rate, nor utilisation rate between the three stimulation regimes and no differences in the pregnancy rate/initiated cycle irrespective of age and stimulation regimen in any of the groups. 'Non poor' responders had a significantly greater pregnancy rate/initiated cycle for all stimulation regimens in both age groups compared with 'poor' responders.
CONCLUSION:
This large retrospective study of 'poor' responders has not shown a difference in pregnancy rates/initiated cycle between stimulation regimens.