СРАВНИТЕЛЬНЫЙ АНАЛИЗ ЭФФЕКТИВНОСТИ РАЗЛИЧНЫХ ПРОТОКОЛОВ В ЗАВИСИМОСТИ ОТ ВВЕДЕНИЯ АГОНИСТОВ ИЛИ АНТАГОНИСТОВ ГнРГ.
Ключевые слова:
человеческий менопаузальный гонадотропин, рекомбинантный фолликулостимулирующий гормон, антагонист гонадотропин-рилизинг гормона, экстракорпоральное оплодотворениеАннотация
Использование различных протоколов стимуляции овуляции рекомбинантными гонадотропинами требует дифференцированной оценки эффективности стимуляции пациенток, в зависимости от последующего введения агонистов или антагонистов ГнРГ, которая мало представлена в доступной литературе
Библиографические ссылки
1. Mamadalieva D. M., Gafurova F. A. The Study of Clinical, Anamnestic, and Hormonal Parameters in Patients with Infertility Prior to Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) Protocols // American Journal of Medicine and Medical Sciences 2025, 15(5): 1600-1602 DOI: 10.5923/j.ajmms.20251505.64
2. Korsak V.S., Dolgushina N.V., Korneyeva I.V., Koloda YU.A., Smirnova A.A., Anshina M.B. et al. Female infertility: clinical guidelines. 2021. Moscow; 2021. 81 p. (In Russ.) Available at: https://rd1.medgis.ru/uploads/userfiles/ hared/StandartMed/Protokol-acusher/jenskoe-besplodie-2021.pdf.
3. Alper M.M., Fauser B.C. Ovarian stimulation protocols for IVF: is more better than less? Reprod Biomed Online. 2017;34(4):345–353. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.rbmo. 2017.01.010.
4. Howie R., Kay V. Controlled ovarian stimulation for in-vitro fertilization. Br J Hosp Med (Lond). 2018;79(4):194–199. https://doi.org/10.12968/ hmed.2018.79.4.194.
5. van der Linden M., Buckingham K., Farquhar C., Kremer J.A., Metwally M. Luteal phase support for assisted reproduction cycles. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;2015(7):CD009154. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858. CD009154.pub3.
6. Levi Setti P.E., Alviggi C., Colombo G.L., Pisanelli C., Ripellino C., Longobardi S. et al. Human recombinant follicle stimulating hormone (rFSH) compared to urinary human menopausal gonadotropin (HMG) for ovarian stimulation in assisted reproduction: a literature review and cost evaluation. J Endoc Investig. 2015;38(5):497–503. https://doi. org/10.1007/s40618-014-0204-4.
7. Orvieto R. HMG versus recombinant FSH plus recombinant LH in ovarian stimulation for IVF: does the source of LH preparation matter? Reprod Biomed Online. 2019; 39(6):1001–1006. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2019.08.010.
8. Chen C.D., Chiang Y.T., Yang P.K., Chen M.J., Chang C.H., Yang Y.S., Chen S.U. Frequency of low serum LH is associated with increased early pregnancy loss in IVF/ICSI cycles. Reprod Biomed Online. 2016;33(4):449–457. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2016.07.001.
9. Gleicher N., Kushnir V.A., Barad D.H. Worldwide decline of IVF birth rates and its probable causes. Hum Reprod Open. 2019;2019(3):hoz017. https://doi.org/10.1093/hropen/hoz017.
10. Lehert P., Kolibianakis E.M., Venetis C.A., Schertz J., Saunders H., Arriagada P. et al. Recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone (r-hFSH) plus recombinant luteinizing hormone versus r-hFSH alone for ovarian stimulation during assisted reproductive technology: systematic review and metaanalysis. Repr Biol Endocrin. 2014;12:17. https://doi. org/10.1186/1477-7827-12-17.
11. Vuong T.N., Phung H.T., Ho M.T. Recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone and recombinant luteinizing hormone versus recombinant folliclestimulating hormone alone during GnRH antagonist ovarian stimulation in patients aged ≥35 years: a randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod. 2015;30(5):1188–1195. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dev038.
12. Mochtar M.H., Danhof N., Olugbenga Ayeleke R., van der Veen F., van Wely M. Recombinant luteinizing hormone (rLH) and recombinant follicle stimulating hormone (rFSH) for ovarian stimulation in IVF/ICSI cycles. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;(5):CD005070. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858. cd005070.pub3.
