Reply to Why are high stims bad for low ovarian reserve?

Forum Index » Infertility Support and Discussion

Reply to "Why are high stims bad for low ovarian reserve? "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]This is still being studied but I believe the current theory is that anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH), LH, testosterone, and E2 are significantly higher in follicles from a natural cycle than in stimulated IVF follicles whereas FSH is significantly lower. This suggests an alteration of the follicular metabolism in stimulated cycles.
Here's a paper that compared hormone levels in the follicular fluid from NC-IVF and conventional IVF
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24608520

However, here is a paper that compared the number of live births from women under 35 who had normal ovarian reserves and it found no difference between mild stimulation and conventional stimulation.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26524799

[/quote]

From the second paper:
"For aged ? 35 there were no differences in pregnancy rates per transfer but a trend for higher pregnancy rates per retrieval with conventional stimulation. [b]For all other age groups both pregnancy rates per transfer and retrieval were significantly higher with conventional stimulation.[/b] This was reflected with a higher average number of babies born per retrieval with conventional."

In other words, women over the age of 35 who had good ovarian reserves had higher success rates with conventional IVF.

Also, the authors noted that more than one pregnancy can be achieved with conventional IVF through freezing embryos.
[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics