Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF )
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gianaroli, L.
Right arrow Articles by Fortini, D.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Gianaroli, L.
Right arrow Articles by Fortini, D.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Human Reproduction, Vol. 9, No. 2, pp. 220-225, 1994
© 1994 European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology

other

Prospective randomized study of D-Trp6-LHRH versus buserelin in long desensitization protocols for medically assisted conception cycles

L. Gianaroli1, A.P. Ferraretti, E. Feliciani, C. Tabanelli, C. Magli and D. Fortini

Reproductive Medicine Unit, Villa Regina Via Castiglione 113/2, Bologna 40136, Italy

Correspondence: 1To whom correspondence should be addressed

In a prospective, controlled, randomized study where two different agonists were used, we compared three different long desensitization protocols for induction of multiple follicular growth in medically assisted conception cycles. In protocol A, 30 patients were injected with buserelin twice a day for 15 days prior to ovarian stimulation until human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG) administration. In protocol B, 30 patients were injected with a single dose of long acting Triptorelin (3.75mg) 15 days before the ovarian stimulation onset. In protocol C, 30 patients were injected with the long acting Triptorelin 4 weeks before ovarian stimulation followed by daily administration of 0.1 mg of the same agonist until HCG injection. There was no difference in the ovarian response to exogenous gonadotrophin stimulation, except for the presence of premature luteinization in two patients in group B. A significantly higher number of mature oocytes was collected from patients with protocol A; however, the fertilization and cleavage rate demonstrated no significant difference among the three groups of patients. The ongoing pregnancy rate and the implanation rate per treatment cycle were very similar in the three study groups. When the convenience, cost and side-effects for the patient are being considered, protocol B should be selected as the first choice when the agonist is utilized for the purpose of inducing pituitary desensitization before and during ovarian stimulation.

Key words: GnRH agonistIVF/IVF/ovarian stimulation/serum oestradiol/progesterone/LH concentrations


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.