黄体期和卵泡期促排卵在卵巢低反应患者中应用.docVIP

黄体期和卵泡期促排卵在卵巢低反应患者中应用 　　[摘要] 目的 观察及比较不同时期促排卵方案对POR患者的临床结局。 方法 回顾性分析37例卵巢低反应患者第1周期行卵泡期促排卵失败后，第2周期改行黄体期促排卵，与109例行卵泡期微刺激促排卵患者对比，比较两组促排卵方案的胚胎发育及妊娠结局情况。 结果 黄体期促排卵组共获卵120枚，卵泡期促排卵组获卵379枚，两组平均获卵数[（4.37±1.07） vs （4.79±1.12）]无统计学差异（P0.05）。但黄体期促排卵组的正常受精率[（93.3%） vs （73.4%）]、优质胚胎率[（88.7%） vs （78.7%）]及临床妊娠率[（27.0%） vs （13.4%）]均显著高于卵泡期促排卵组，差异有统计学意义（P0.05）。 结论 黄体期促排卵是可行的，不失为卵巢反应低下患者促排卵的新思路。 　　[关键词] 黄体期促排卵；卵泡期促排卵；微刺激；卵巢低反应；妊娠结局 　　[中图分类号] R711.75 [文献标识码] B [文章编号] 1673-9701（2017）08-0062-04 　　[Abstract] Objective To observe and compare the clinical outcome of ovariectomized patients in different periods. Methods 37 poor ovarian response patients were retrospectively analyzed. The patients switched to undergo the promotion ovulation at luteal phase in the second cycle after the failure of promoting ovulation at follicular phase. And the patients were compared with 109 cases undergoing micro-stimulation to promote ovulation. The embryo development and pregnancy outcome between the two ovulation promotion programs were compared. Results There were 120 ova in the luteal-phase ovulation promotion group and 379 ova in the follicular-period ovulation promotion group. There was no statistical difference in the average number of obtained ova between the two groups[（4.37±1.07） vs （4.79±1.12）]. Normal fertilization rate[（93.3%）vs.（73.4%）]， good quality embryo rate[（88.7%） vs （78.7%）]and clinical pregnancy rate[（27.0%） vs （13.4%）] in the luteal-phase ovulation promotion group was higher than that of the follicular period ovulation promotion group， respectively. And the differences were statistically significant（P0.05）. Conclusion Promoting ovulation at luteal-phase is feasible， which is a new idea for ovulation induction in patients with low ovarian response. 　　[Key words] Ovulation promotion at luteal-phase； Ovulation promotion at follicular period； Micro-stimulation； Poor ovarian response； Pregnancy outcome 　　卵巢低反??（poor ovarian response，POR）主要表现为促排卵获卵数少，卵子质量下降，临床妊娠率低等。探索合理个体化的促排卵方案以提高卵子