Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF ) Freely available
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 ISI Web of Science
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 arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (10)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Tozer, A.J.
Right arrow Articles by Grudzinskas, J.G.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Tozer, A.J.
Right arrow Articles by Grudzinskas, J.G.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Human Reproduction, Vol. 16, No. 1, 91-95, January 2001
© 2001 European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology

Does laparoscopic ovarian diathermy affect the outcome of IVF–embryo transfer in women with polycystic ovarian syndrome? A retrospective comparative study

A.J. Tozer1, T. Al-Shawaf1, A. Zosmer1, S. Hussain1, C. Wilson1, A.M. Lower1 and J.G. Grudzinskas1,2,3

1 Fertility Centre, St Bartholomew's and The London Hospitals Trust, London EC1A, UK and 2 Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, St Bartholomew's and Royal London Hospitals School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary and Westfield College, Royal London Hospital, London E1 1BB, UK

Controlled ovarian stimulation for IVF and embryo transfer and outcome parameters were compared retrospectively in 31 women with clomiphene-resistant polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS). Of these women, 15 had previously undergone laparoscopic ovarian diathermy before IVF (group A, total 22 cycles) and 16 had not had surgical treatment (group B, total 24 cycles). No statistically significant differences were observed in the number of oocytes retrieved, although the number of embryos available for transfer was significantly higher in group B (7.1 ± 3.8 versus 4.6 ± 2.7, P < 0.01). The clinical pregnancy rate per embryo transfer appeared to be higher in group B (63.2 versus 41.2%), as did the miscarriage rate (66.7 versus 28.6%), giving an apparent improved ongoing pregnancy rate per embryo transfer in group A (29.4 versus 10.5%), but this was not statistically significantly different. The incidence of severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) was apparently higher in group B (4.2 versus 0%), but this difference was not statistically significant. No cases of severe OHSS were seen in group A. Ovarian diathermy does not appear to have a deleterious effect on controlled ovarian stimulation, and the outcome of IVF–embryo transfer may be beneficial in decreasing the risk of severe OHSS and improving the ongoing clinical pregnancy rate.

Key words: IVF-embryo transfer/laparoscopic ovarian diathermy/polycystic ovarian syndrome

3 To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: m.a.smith{at}mds.qmw.ac.uk


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.