Adjuvant low-dose aspirin therapy in poor responders undergoing in vitro fertilization: a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Unveiling the potential effects of acetylsalicylic acid: insights into regeneration in endometrial stem cells

BACKGROUND

Although acetylsalicylic acid has been widely used for decades to treat and prevent various diseases, its potential effects on endometrial receptivity and subsequent pregnancy rates are still controversial due to conflicting data: many reports have shown positive effects of acetylsalicylic acid, whereas others have found that it has no effect. Furthermore, the direct effects of acetylsalicylic acid on various functions of normal endometrial cells, especially endometrial stem cells, and their underlying molecular mechanisms have not yet been proven. Recently, studies have revealed that a reduced number of active stem/progenitor cells within endometrial tissue limits cyclic endometrial regeneration and subsequently decreases pregnancy success rates, suggesting that endometrial stem cells play a critical role in endometrial regeneration and subsequent endometrial receptivity.

METHODS

We assessed whether aspirin treatment can inhibit various endometrial stem cell functions related to regenerative capacity, such as self-renewal, migration, pluripotency/stemness, and differentiation capacity, in vitro. Next, we evaluated whether SERPINB2 regulates the effects of aspirin on endometrial stem cell functions by depleting SERPINB2 expression with specific shRNA targeting SERPINB2. To further investigate whether aspirin also inhibits various endometrial stem cell functions in vivo, aspirin was administered daily to mice through intraperitoneal (i.p.) injection for 7 days.

RESULTS

In addition to its previously identified roles, to the best of our knowledge, we found for the first time that acetylsalicylic acid directly inhibits various human endometrial stem cell functions related to regenerative capacity (i.e., self-renewal, migration, differentiation, and capacity) through its novel target gene SERPINB2 in vitro. Acetylsalicylic acid exerts its function by suppressing well-known prosurvival pathways, such as Akt and/or ERK1/2 signaling, through a SERPINB2 signaling cascade. Moreover, we also found that acetylsalicylic acid markedly inhibits regenerative capacity-related functions in endometrial stem cells within tissue.

CONCLUSIONS

We have found that acetylsalicylic acid has diverse effects on various endometrial stem cell functions related to regenerative capacity. Our findings are a critical step toward the development of more effective therapeutic strategies to increase the chances of successful pregnancy. Video Abstract.

Aspirin for Endometrial Preparation in Patients Undergoing IVF: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effect of aspirin on IVF success rates when used as an adjuvant treatment for endometrial preparation.

DATA SOURCES

Relevant publications were comprehensively selected from PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) up to November 15, 2020.

STUDY SELECTION

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and retrospective cohort studies that used aspirin as an adjuvant treatment for endometrial preparation and reported subsequent pregnancy outcomes were included. Studies were excluded if aspirin was used before and/or during ovarian stimulation.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

This systematic review and meta-analysis included a total of 7 studies. Risk of bias assessment was based on the methodology and categories listed in the Cochrane Handbook for the RCTs and the Newcastle-Ottawa scale for the retrospective studies. The primary outcome was live birth rate. Summary measures were reported as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). There was significant evidence that aspirin for endometrial preparation improved live birth rates (OR  1.52; 95% CI   1.15-2.00). No effect was noted for clinical pregnancy rates (OR  1.37; 95% CI   1.00-1.87); however, aspirin was associated with improved pregnancy rates in a subgroup analysis of patients receiving oocyte donation (OR 2.53; 95% CI 1.30-4.92) and in the sensitivity analysis (OR 1.3; 95% CI   1.02-1.66). No effect of aspirin was found for implantation or miscarriage rates (OR 1.31; 95% CI  0.51-3.36 and OR 0.41; 95% CI  0.02-7.42, respectively).

CONCLUSION

These findings support a beneficial effect of aspirin for endometrial preparation on IVF success rates, mainly live birth rates, outside the context of ovarian stimulation. However, this evidence is based on poor quality data and needs to be confirmed with high-quality RCTs.

In vitro Fertilization Procedures with Embryo Transfer and Their Association with Thrombophilia, Thrombosis and Early Antithrombotic Treatments

In vitro fertilization (IVF) procedures have been frequently associated with antithrombotic treatments, in particular, to aspirin or low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH). The rationale of this treatment is based on the increase of thrombotic risk occurring in this clinical context. Indeed, both prothrombotic changes of coagulation parameters specifically related to IVF procedures as well as the presence of potential thrombophilic alterations may concur to increase the risk in these women. Furthermore, the presence of thrombophilia has been suggested as a potential cause of recurrent IVF failures. Therefore, antithrombotic treatments have been historically planned to prevent thrombotic disorders during pharmacological ovarian stimulation and/or to increase a successful rate of pregnancy and live births after IVF with embryo transfer. However, up to date, the role of inherited and\or acquired thrombophilia is still debated as well as a univocal therapeutic approach is lacking in women with infertility. The administration of antithrombotic drugs differs in several studies and even the dosages of aspirin and\or low-molecular-weight heparin are different. This review focuses on underlining current evidence on the role of thrombophilia and thromboprophylaxis in women selected for IVF with embryo transfer.

Does low-dose aspirin improve pregnancy rate in women undergoing frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycle? A pilot double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled trial

AIM

To evaluate the effect of adjuvant low-dose aspirin therapy on clinical pregnancy rate and uterine perfusion in women undergoing frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) cycles.

METHODS

This study was performed as a pilot randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled trial, from May 2012 to February 2015. Overall, 60 available eligible women who were candidates for FET were randomly assigned to two groups receiving either 100 mg oral aspirin (n =30) or placebo (n =30). The primary outcome measure was clinical pregnancy rate. Secondary outcome measures were pulsatility index (PI), resistance index (RI), implantation rate, live birth rate and miscarriage rate.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in endometrial thickness, PI and RI. However, the study group had higher rates of clinical pregnancy, implantation, live birth (P = 0.042, P = 0.031 and P = 0.007, respectively) and lower rate of miscarriage (P = 0.020) as compared to the control group. Twin birth rate was comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSION

Our pilot study demonstrated that administration of low-dose aspirin in FET cycles results in better pregnancy, implantation and live birth rates without changing the uterine hemodynamics or endometrial thickness. However, further randomized clinical studies in larger populations are needed to confirm these findings.

The effect of testosterone gel on fertility outcomes in women with a poor response in in vitro fertilization cycles: A pilot randomized clinical trial

Background

In this study, the effect of testosterone gel administration during ovulation induction on the fertility rate was examined in women with a poor ovarian response in in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles.

Materials and Methods

The current study is a single-blinded, randomized clinical trial. Patients who met inclusion (Bologna) criteria were placed in the antagonist cycle group. The patients were randomly divided into two groups each included 25 participants treated with a placebo (lubricant gel, the controls) and testosterone gel (intervention). Fertility outcomes were compared between two study groups.

Results

The mean ± standard deviation (SD) age of intervention (41.04 ± 3.77) versus control group (39.69 ± 3.29) was not statistically different. The two studied groups were not statistically different in terms of follicle-stimulating hormone; antral follicle count, IVF, anti-Mullerian hormone, and the duration of infertility. The mean ± SD of oocyte 2.48 ± 1.64 versus 1.17 ± 1.27 and embryo 1.60 ± 1.58 versus 0.39 ± 0.58 in intervention group was significantly higher than control group (P < 0.01). The rate of pregnancy 16% versus 0% and embryo of quality A-B was significantly higher in intervention group than control (60% versus 17.4%, P < 0.05).

Conclusion

The results of the current study showed that the testosterone gel has a significant impact on the fertility rate in women with a poor response in the IVF cycles. Further, randomized clinical trials with larger sample sized are recommended.

Defining Low Prognosis Patients Undergoing Assisted Reproductive Technology: POSEIDON Criteria-The Why

Women with impaired ovarian reserve or poor ovarian response (POR) to exogenous gonadotropin stimulation present a challenge for reproductive specialists. The primary reasons relate to the still limited knowledge about the POR pathophysiology and the lack of practical solutions for the management of these conditions. Indeed, clinical trials using the current standards to define POR failed to show evidence in favor of a particular treatment modality. Furthermore, critical factors for reproductive success, such as the age-dependent embryo aneuploidy rates and the intrinsic ovarian resistance to gonadotropin stimulation, are not taken into consideration by the current POR criteria. As a result, the accepted definitions for POR have been criticized for their inadequacy concerning the proper patient characterization and for not providing clinicians a guide for therapeutic management. A novel system to classify infertility patients with "expected" or "unexpected" inappropriate ovarian response to exogenous gonadotropins-the POSEIDON criteria-was developed to provide a more nuanced picture of POR and to guide physicians in the management of such patients. The new standards are provoking as they challenge the current terminology of POR in favor of the newly defined concept of "low prognosis." This article provides readers a critical appraisal of the existing criteria that standardize the definition of POR and explains the primary reasons for the development of the POSEIDON criteria.

Efficacy evaluation of low-dose aspirin in IVF/ICSI patients evidence from 13 RCTs: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of existing literature to evaluate the different outcomes of low-dose aspirin on patients undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF)/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), including clinical pregnancy rate, implantation rate, live birth rate, miscarriage rate, fertilization rate, number of oocytes retrieved, and so forth.

METHODS

Electronic databases including PubMed, MEDLINE, and Embase were searched between 1997 and March 2016 to identity eligible studies. The following comparisons between treatment groups were included: aspirin versus placebo; aspirin versus control group; aspirin versus aspirin + prednisolone + control.

RESULTS

Thirteen randomized controlled trials which included 3104 participants were selected. There were no significant differences in implantation rate (RR = 1.15; 95% CI = 0.78-1.70), live birth rate (RR = 1.06; 95% CI = 0.93-1.21), miscarriage rate (RR = 1.28; 95% CI = 0.93-1.77), fertilization rate (RR = 0.91; 95% CI = 0.75-1.11), and endometrial thickness (WMD = 0.15; 95% CI = -0.38-0.67). But the research showed that aspirin treatment may improve the clinical pregnancy rate (RR = 1.16; 95% CI = 1.04-1.28) compared to placebo or no treatment, and reduce the number of oocytes retrieved (WMD = -0.68; 95% CI = -0.91-0.46).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that low-dose aspirin may improve the pregnancy rate in IVF/ICSI, with the recommended clinical use dose of 100 mg/day. Considering the limitation of included studies, further well-designed large-scaled RCTs are necessary to clarify whether aspirin may improve assisted reproduction outcomes in IVF/ICSI patients.

Preconception Low-Dose Aspirin Restores Diminished Pregnancy and Live Birth Rates in Women With Low-Grade Inflammation: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Trial

Context

Inflammation is linked to causes of infertility. Low-dose aspirin (LDA) may improve reproductive success in women with chronic, low-grade inflammation.

Objective

To investigate the effect of preconception-initiated LDA on pregnancy rate, pregnancy loss, live birth rate, and inflammation during pregnancy.

Design

Stratified secondary analysis of a multicenter, block-randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial.

Setting

Four US academic medical centers, 2007 to 2012.

Participants

Healthy women aged 18 to 40 years (N = 1228) with one to two prior pregnancy losses actively attempting to conceive.

Intervention

Preconception-initiated, daily LDA (81 mg) or matching placebo taken up to six menstrual cycles attempting pregnancy and through 36 weeks' gestation in women who conceived.

Main Outcome Measures

Confirmed pregnancy, live birth, and pregnancy loss were compared between LDA and placebo, stratified by tertile of preconception, preintervention serum high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) (low, <0.70 mg/L; middle, 0.70 to <1.95 mg/L; high, ≥1.95 mg/L).

Results

Live birth occurred in 55% of women overall. The lowest pregnancy and live birth rates occurred among the highest hsCRP tertile receiving placebo (44% live birth). LDA increased live birth among high-hsCRP women to 59% (relative risk, 1.35; 95% confidence interval, 1.08 to 1.67), similar to rates in the lower and mid-CRP tertiles. LDA did not affect clinical pregnancy or live birth in the low (live birth: 59% LDA, 54% placebo) or midlevel hsCRP tertiles (live birth: 59% LDA, 59% placebo).

Conclusions

In women attempting conception with elevated hsCRP and prior pregnancy loss, LDA may increase clinical pregnancy and live birth rates compared with women without inflammation and reduce hsCRP elevation during pregnancy.

Low-Dose Aspirin and Sporadic Anovulation in the EAGeR Randomized Trial

CONTEXT

Among women with a single, recent pregnancy loss, daily preconception low-dose aspirin (LDA) increased the live birth rate with no effect on pregnancy loss. Ovulation is a potential mechanism underlying this effect.

OBJECTIVE

We estimated the effect of LDA on the per-cycle risk of anovulation among eumenorrheic women.

DESIGN

Multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of daily LDA on reproductive outcomes. Preconception follow-up lasted 1 to 6 menstrual cycles (ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT00467363).

SETTING

Four US medical centers during 2007 to 2011.

PATIENTS OR OTHER PARTICIPANTS

Healthy women (n = 1214), age 18 to 40, were attempting pregnancy, had regular menstrual cycles (21 to 42 days), and had a history of 1 to 2 documented pregnancy losses, ≤2 live births, and no infertility. All participants completed at least 1 menstrual cycle of follow-up; none withdrew due to adverse events.

INTERVENTION

Aspirin (81 mg) daily for 1 to 6 menstrual cycles.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Per-cycle risk of anovulation, defined as the absence of both a positive spot-urine pregnancy test and a luteinizing hormone (LH) peak (2.5-fold increase in daily urinary LH). Hypothesis formulation preceded data collection.

RESULTS

Among 4340 cycles, LDA was not associated with anovulation (LDA: 13.4%, placebo: 11.1%; risk ratio = 1.16, 95% confidence interval, 0.88 to 1.52). Results were similar among women with a single, recent loss.

CONCLUSIONS

Daily LDA had no effect on anovulation among women with a history of 1 to 2 pregnancy losses. LDA may affect fertility via other pathways, and these warrant further study.

Aspirin for in vitro fertilisation

BACKGROUND

Aspirin is used with the aim of optimising the chance of live birth in women undergoing assisted reproductive technology (ART), despite inconsistent evidence of its efficacy and safety (in terms of intraoperative bleeding during oocyte retrieval and risk of miscarriage). The most appropriate time to commence aspirin therapy and the length of treatment required are also still to be determined. This is the second update of the review first published in 2007.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of aspirin in women undergoing ART.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2016, Issue 4) in the Cochrane Library (searched 9 May 2016); the databases MEDLINE (1946 to 9 May 2016) and Embase (1974 to 9 May 2016); and trial registers (ClinicalTrials.gov and the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform search portal). We also examined the reference lists of all known primary studies and review articles, citation lists of relevant publications and abstracts of major scientific meetings, combined with the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group's search strategy.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials on aspirin for women undergoing ART.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial eligibility and risk of bias and extracted the data. The primary review outcome was live birth. Secondary outcomes included clinical pregnancy, ongoing pregnancy, multiple pregnancy, miscarriage, and other complications associated with IVF/ICSI or with pregnancy and birth. We combined data to calculate risk ratios (RRs) (for dichotomous data) and mean differences (MDs) (for continuous data) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Statistical heterogeneity was assessed using the I² statistic. We assessed the overall quality of the evidence for the main comparisons using GRADE methods.

MAIN RESULTS

The search identified 13 trials as eligible for inclusion in the review, including a total of 2653 participants with a mean age of 35 years. Ten studies used a dose of 100 mg and three used 80 mg of aspirin per day. In most of them, aspirin was commenced immediately at the start of down-regulation, while the duration of treatment varied widely. Eight studies provided a placebo for the control group.There was no evidence of a difference between the aspirin group and the group receiving no treatment or placebo in rates of live birth (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.15, 3 RCTs, n = 1053, I² = 15%, moderate-quality evidence). In addition, clinical pregnancy rates were also similar for the two groups (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.17, 10 RCTs, n = 2142, I² = 27%, moderate-quality evidence); sensitivity analysis, excluding studies at high risk of bias, did not change the effect estimate. There was no evidence of a difference between groups in terms of multiple pregnancy as confirmed by ultrasound (RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.25, 2 RCTs, n = 656, I² = 0%, low-quality evidence), miscarriage (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.77, 5 RCTs, n = 1497, I² = 0%, low-quality evidence), ectopic pregnancy (RR 1.86, 95% CI 0.75 to 4.63, 3 RCTs, n = 1135, I² = 0%, very low quality evidence) or vaginal bleeding (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.14 to 7.13, 1 RCT, n = 487, very low quality evidence). Data were lacking on other adverse effects.The overall quality of the evidence ranged from very low to moderate; limitations were poor reporting of study methods and suspected publication bias.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Currently there is no evidence in favour of routine use of aspirin in order to improve pregnancy rates for a general IVF population. This is based on available data from randomised controlled trials, where there is currently no evidence of an effect of aspirin on women undergoing ART, as there is no single outcome measure demonstrating a benefit with its use. Furthermore, current evidence does not exclude the possibility of adverse effects.

Effect of traditional Chinese comprehensive therapy on gestation in patients with previously failed in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer

OBJECTIVE

To explore the effect of traditional Chinese comprehensive therapy (TCCT) on promoting gestation in patients with previously failed in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF-ET) because of kidney deficiency, liver stagnation, and blood stasis (KLB).

METHODS

Sixty-seven patients were enrolled in this study and divided into two groups: a trial group with 35 patients and a control group with 32 patients. The trial group was given TCCT for 3 months, then administered IVF-ET or awaited natural pregnancy. The control group was administered IVF--ET without TCCT 3 months after the previous IVF-ET or natural pregnancy attempt. The patterns of KLB were observed both before and after treatment. The natural pregnancy rate of the two groups was calculated after treatment. Differences between the two groups were compared after using IVF-ET treatment again in fertilized egg number and fertilization rate were evaluated.

RESULTS

After treatment with TCM comprehensive therapy, seven patients in the treatment group became pregnant, while there were no successful conceptions in the control group. The difference in clinical pregnancy rate in the initial cycle and transfer cycle of IVF were significantly different (P < 0.05). The trial group had a significantly higher conception rate than that of the control group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

TCCT can promote the natural pre nancy rate in patients with previously failed IVF-ET. TCCT could increase patients' fertilized egg number, fertilization rate, pregnancy rate, and clinical pregnancy rate after another IVF-ET treatment.

Poor responders in IVF: an update in therapy

INTRODUCTION

Assisted reproduction techniques are the frequent treatment of infertility. Despite the advances in science and technology, the management of poor responder patients is still considered as one of the most urgent problems. The lack of unified definition makes the management of the poor responder patients very difficult. The aim of this review is to examine and compare the different studies done about the problem of poor responder patients.

METHODS

On an online research of MEDLINE/PUBMED, we found several studies on pharmacological treatment for poor responders' patients.

RESULTS

Our review shows that in the years numerous therapies for the management of these patients who do not respond to ovarian stimulation have been evaluated and studied, but the main problem is the large and still not well-defined meaning of poor responder women.

CONCLUSION

The management of the poor responder patients is very difficult. Currently, there is no any standard treatment for poor responder patients. Considering the importance of the problem, it is important to identify a diagnostic and therapeutic target. Our review shows that there are many studies with different therapeutic approaches which deserve further in-depth study to standardize diagnostic and therapeutic target.

How to define, diagnose and treat poor responders? Responses from a worldwide survey of IVF clinics

Poor responders represent a significant percentage of couples treated in IVF units (10-24%), but the standard definition of poor responders remains uncertain and consequently optimal treatment options remain subjective and not evidence-based. In an attempt to provide uniformity on the definition, diagnosis and treatment of poor responders, a worldwide survey was conducted asking IVF professionals a set of questions on this complex topic. The survey was posted on www.IVF-worldwide.com, the largest and most comprehensive IVF-focused website for physicians and embryologists. A total of 196 centres replied, forming a panel of IVF units with a median of 400 cycles per year. The present study shows that the definition of poor responders is still subjective, and many practices do not use evidence-based treatment for this category of patients. Our hope is that by leveraging the great potential of the internet, future studies may provide immediate large-scale sampling to standardize both poor responder definition and treatment options.

ART and uterine pathology: how relevant is the maternal side for implantation?

BACKGROUND

Assisted reproduction technology (ART) has become a standard treatment for infertile couples. Increased success rates obtained over the years have resulted primarily from improved embryo quality, but implantation rates still remain lower than expected. The uterus, an important player in implantation, has been frequently neglected. While a number of uterine pathologies have been associated with decreased natural fertility, less information exists regarding the impact of these pathologies in ART. This report reviews the evidence to help clinicians advise ART patients.

METHODS

An electronic search of PubMed and EMBASE was performed to identify articles in the English, French or Spanish language published until May 2014 which addressed uterine pathology and ART. Data from natural conception were used only in the absence of data from ART. Studies were classified in decreasing categories: RCTs, prospective controlled trials, prospective non-controlled trials, retrospective studies and experimental studies. Studies included in lower categories were only used if insufficient evidence was available. Pooled data were obtained from systematic reviews with meta-analyses when available. The summary of the evidence for the different outcomes and the degree of the recommendation for interventions were based on the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation) statement recommendations.

RESULTS

There is strong evidence that surrogacy is effective for uterine agenesia. For the remaining pathologies, however, there is very little evidence that the established treatments improve outcomes, or that these pathologies have a negative effect on ART. In the presence of an apparently normal uterus, assessing endometrial receptivity (ER) is the goal; however diagnostic tests are still under development.

CONCLUSIONS

The real effect of different uterine/endometrial integrity pathologies on ART is not known. Moreover, currently proposed treatments are not based on solid evidence, and little can be done to assess ER in normal or abnormal conditions. No strong recommendations can be given based on the published experience, bringing an urgent need for well-designed studies. In this context, we propose algorithms to study the uterus in ART.

Recombinant Luteinizing Hormone supplementation in poor responders undergoing IVF: a systematic review and meta-analysis

The results of several studies about the effectiveness of recombinant luteinizing hormone (rLH) supplementation in poor responder in vitro fertilization (IVF) patients were conflicting. To evaluate the current available data regarding the efficacy of rLH supplementation in poor responders, a meta-analysis was performed. A systemic search was performed without language limitation but restricted to randomized controlled trial (RCT). We mainly explored MEDLINE, EMBASE, CNKI and Cochrane Library for the relevant studies. Three studies were considered eligible for inclusion. The meta-analysis indicated that rLH supplementation did not increase the ongoing pregnancy rate in poor responders (OR 1.30, 95% CI: 0.80, 2.11). Furthermore, there was no significant difference in the number of oocytes retrieved, total dose of rFSH used, total duration of stimulation, number of retrieved metaphase II oocytes and cycle cancellation rate between the study and control groups. In conclusions, the available evidence does not support the addition of rLH in poor responders treated with rFSH and GnRHa for IVF. It was inconclusive. Future research should be based on strict criteria to define poor responders, and large, well-designed RCTs are necessary to definitively answer the important question of whether there was need to use rLH in poor responders undergoing IVF.

Diminished Ovarian Reserve, Causes, Assessment and Management

Diminished ovarian reserve predicts diminished ovarian response to stimulation but does not predict cycle fecundity. It has been recently defined by ESHRE, the Bologna's criteria, according to which at least two of the following three features should be present: (1) Age >40 years/any other risk factor for DOR, (2) abnormal ovarian reserve test, i.e. antral follicle count, AMH, (3) poor ovarian response in a previous stimulated cycle, i.e. less than three follicles after standard gonadotropin stimulation. Poor response to maximal stimulation on two previous occasions also defines DOR.

The treatment options are limited. Avoiding the GnRH agonist long protocol and stimulation with microdose flare or antagonist protocol yields better results. Adjuvant therapy with LH, DHEAS and growth hormone shows some benefit in improving the oocyte yield. It is advisable to perform ICSI for all obtained oocytes and some advocate assisted hatching. Pregnancy rates are, however, poor and often these patients require ovum donation. Developing tests that will diagnose DOR in a low-risk population will allow women to plan their reproductive careers early.

How to cite this article

Kaur M, Arora M. Diminished Ovarian Reserve, Causes, Assessment and Management. Int J Infertility Fetal Med 2013;4(2):45-55.

Low-dose aspirin for in vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection: a systematic review and a meta-analysis of the literature

BACKGROUND

It was hypothesized that low-dose aspirin could improve implantation rates in subsequent pregnancies in women undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF)/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). Previous studies have shown inconclusive results or focused on surrogate endpoints. We therefore conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature investigating the effect of low-dose aspirin on hard outcomes, including live birth rate, pregnancy rate and miscarriage.

METHODS

MEDLINE and EMBASE databases were searched up to November 2011. Randomized controlled trials comparing low-dose aspirin with placebo/no treatment in IVF/ICSI women were included. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) and 95%confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies with 6403 patients were included. The use of aspirin did not improve live birth pregnancy rate compared with placebo or no treatment (1.08; 95% CI, 0.90, 1.29). Pregnancy rates were significantly increased in patients randomized to low-dose aspirin (OR, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.01, 1.39), but miscarriage rates were not (OR, 1.18; 95% CI, 0.82, 1.68). Results of sensitivity analyses including high-quality studies did not show statistically significant differences in all considered endpoints.

CONCLUSIONS

The results of this study do not show a substantial efficacy of aspirin inwomen undergoing IVF/ICSI and do not support the use of low-dose aspirin to improve the success of IVF/ICSI in terms of pregnancy outcomes. Further high-quality studies evaluating the possible efficacy of aspirin in selected groups of patients are warranted.

A systematic review of randomized trials for the treatment of poor ovarian responders: is there any light at the end of the tunnel?

OBJECTIVE

To assess the definitions for "poor ovarian responders" used among randomized trials for the treatment of women with impaired response to stimulation.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

SETTING

None.

PATIENT(S)

Poor ovarian responders.

INTERVENTION(S)

Treatment modalities for the management of poor ovarian responders.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Number and nature of the criteria used to define poor ovarian response to stimulation and threshold values used.

RESULT(S)

Among 47 randomized trials, 41 different definitions for the patients with poor ovarian response have been used. No more than 3 trials used the same definition, whereas even trials from the same research groups used different definitions across different trials. None of the criteria used was adopted in more than 50% of the trials. Age and antral follicle count were adopted only in 9% of the definitions, whereas the criteria of number of follicles on the final stimulation day and number of oocytes retrieved were used in more than 40% of the trials; nonetheless, even for these criteria, the threshold values were consistently different.

CONCLUSION(S)

The variability regarding the definition of poor ovarian responders appears to be striking. Although the Bologna criteria developed by European Society for Human Reproduction and Embryology consensus in 2011 aim to define a consistent group of patients, their applicability needs to be tested through clinical trials. Meanwhile, meta-analyses of the currently available trials should be strongly discouraged because they may lead to the adoption of interventions of ambiguous value.

Aspirin for in vitro fertilisation

BACKGROUND

Aspirin is used to improve the outcome in women undergoing in vitro fertilisation despite inconsistent evidence of its efficacy. The most appropriate time to commence aspirin therapy and the length of treatment required are also still to be determined. This is an update of the review first published in 2007.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness and safety of aspirin for improving the outcome of in vitro fertilisation and intracytoplasmic sperm injection treatment cycles.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library January 2011), MEDLINE (1966 to January 2011) and EMBASE (1980 to January 2011) databases. We used the research terms: "(aspirin OR acetylsalicylic acid) AND (in-vitro fertilisation OR intracytoplasmic sperm injection)", combined with the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group's search strategy, in order to identify randomised controlled trials on aspirin for women undergoing in vitro fertilisation.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently selected studies to include in the review, extracted data and assessed trial quality.

MAIN RESULTS

The searches identified 13 trials which were eligible for inclusion in the review, including a total of 2653 participants. No significant differences were found between the treatment and control groups for any of the outcomes assessed. No significant differences were found in the meta-analysis of studies investigating the effect of aspirin compared with control on live birth rate (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.72 to 1.15; three studies and 1053 participants), clinical pregnancy rate (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.17; 10 studies and 2142 participants), ectopic and miscarriage rates (RR 1.86, 95% CI 0.75 to 4.63; RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.77) respectively (three and five studies involving 1135 and 1497 participants).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Use of aspirin for women undergoing in vitro fertilisation cannot be recommended due to lack of evidence from the current trial data. Adequately powered trials are needed. It was proposed in the initial version of this review that a sample size of 350 women in each group would be required in order to demonstrate a 10% improvement from the use of aspirin, with 80% power at the 5% significance level. Until such evidence is available, this treatment can not be recommended.

[Cancellation of IVF-ET cycles: poor prognosis, poor responder, or variability of the response to controlled ovarian hyperstimulation? An analysis of 142 cancellations]

INTRODUCTION

This retrospective study aimed at analyzing IVF-ET management and outcome after cancellation of a first cycle for poor response.

PATIENTS AND METHOD

One hundred and forty-two infertile patients were included in this observational study. After an overall analysis on the outcome of the second IVF-ET attempt, a sub-analysis was performed according to the presence or the absence of poor prognostic criteria defined as mentioned: patient age superior to 38 years old, antral follicle count (3-9 mm in diameter) inferior to 10 on cycle day 3 and day 3 serum AMH and FSH levels less than 1 ng/mL and more than 10 IU/mL, respectively. Main outcome measures were the cancellation rates, pregnancy and live birth rates.

RESULTS

When a controlled ovarian stimulation was performed, patients with poor prognosis had higher cancellation rates (37.8% vs. 13.3%, P<0.004) and lower pregnancy and live birth rates (22.2% vs. 35.0%, P<0.05 and 11.1% vs. 26.1%, P<0.05, respectively) as compared to good prognosis women.

CONCLUSION

The relatively high cancellation rate in patients with poor prognosis raises the question of the use of IVF modified natural cycle in this group.

Comparisons of GnRH antagonist versus GnRH agonist protocol in poor ovarian responders undergoing IVF

BACKGROUND

In view of the discrepancies about the GnRH antagonist (GnRH-ant) ovarian stimulation protocols having some potential advantages compared with the GnRH agonist (GnRH-a) protocols in poor ovarian responders IVF/ICSI, a meta-analysis of the published data was performed to compare the efficacy of GnRH-ant versus GnRH-a protocols for ovarian stimulation in IVF poor response patients.

METHODS

We searched for all published articles indexed in MEDLINE (1950-2010), EMBASE (1974-2010) and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI, 1994-2010). Any randomized controlled study that compared the GnRH-ant with GnRH-a in ovarian stimulation protocols for poor responders undergoing IVF/ICSI was included, and data were extracted independently by two reviewers. The searches yielded 64 articles, from which 14 studies met the inclusion criteria. We performed this meta-analysis involving 566 IVF patients in a GnRH-ant protocol group and 561 patients in a GnRH-a protocol group with Review Manager 4.2 software. Odds ratio (OR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to evaluate dichotomous and continuous data, respectively.

RESULTS

Fourteen eligible studies were included in this meta-analysis. GnRH-ant protocols resulted in a statistically significantly lower duration of stimulation compared with GnRH-a protocols (P = 0.04; WMD: -1.88, 95% CI: -3.64, -0.12), but there was no significant difference in the number of oocytes retrieved (P = 0.51; WMD: -0.17, 95% CI -0.69, 0.34) or the number of mature oocytes retrieved (P = 0.99; WMD: -0.01, 95% CI: -1.14, 1.12). Moreover, no significant difference was found in the cycle cancellation rate (CCR, P = 0.67; OR: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.71-1.42) or clinical pregnancy rate (CPR, P = 0.16; OR: 1.23, 95% CI: 0.92, 1.66).

CONCLUSIONS

Clear advantage was gained in duration of stimulation with GnRH-ant in poor ovarian responders undergoing IVF, although there was no statistical difference in the number of oocytes retrieved, the number of mature oocytes retrieved, the CCR and CPR between GnRH-ant and GnRH-a protocols. These results may be helpful to our clinical practice. However, further controlled randomized prospective studies with larger sample sizes are needed.

Interventions for 'poor responders' to controlled ovarian hyper stimulation (COH) in in-vitro fertilisation (IVF)

BACKGROUND

The success of in-vitro fertilisation (IVF) depends on adequate follicle recruitment by using controlled ovarian stimulation with gonadotrophins. Failure to recruit adequate follicles is called 'poor response'. Various treatment protocols have been proposed that are targeted at this cohort of women, aiming to increase their ovarian response.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effectiveness of different treatment interventions in women who have poor response to controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (are poor responders) in the context of IVF.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Specialised Register of controlled trials (MDSG) (5/1/2009), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials (CENTRAL) (4th Quarter 2008), MEDLINE (1950 to November week 3 2008), EMBASE (1980 to 2008 week 52) and The National Research Register (NRR). The citation lists of relevant publications, review articles, abstracts of scientific meetings and included studies were also searched. The authors were contacted to clarify data that were unclear from the trial reports.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing one type of intervention versus another for controlled ovarian stimulation of poor responders to a previous IVF treatment, using a standard long protocol were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers independently scanned the abstracts, identified relevant papers, assessed trial quality and extracted relevant data for inclusion. Validity was assessed in terms of method of randomisation, completeness of treatment cycle and co-intervention. Where possible, data were pooled for analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

The new search identified fifteen trials. Three trials were eligible for inclusion. Ten trials involving eight different comparison groups have been included. Only one trial reported live birth rates.The number of oocytes retrieved were significantly less in the conventional GnRHa long protocol compared to stop protocol and GnRH antagonist protocol.Total dose of gonadotrophins used was significantly higher in the GnRHa long protocol group compared to the Stop protocol and GnRH antagonist groups.Cancellation rates were significantly higher in the GnRHa flare up group compared to the GnRHa long protocol group.None of the studies reported a difference in the miscarriage and ectopic pregnancy rates.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to support the routine use of any particular intervention either for pituitary down regulation, ovarian stimulation or adjuvant therapy in the management of poor responders to controlled ovarian stimulation in IVF. More robust data from good quality RCTs with relevant outcomes are needed.

Meta-analysis: drawing conclusions when study results vary

Low-dose aspirin has been suggested to positively impact a number of clinical outcomes associated with oxidative stress; however, results of clinical trials surrounding its effect on a woman's ability to achieve and sustain pregnancy have been inconclusive. A meta-analysis is an advantageous tool in this situation. Meta-analyses allow researchers to formally and systematically pool together all relevant research in order to clarify findings and form conclusions based on all currently available information. The purpose of this chapter is to describe how to perform a meta-analysis, clarify the impact of model selection, and provide examples of implementation.

[Color Doppler imaging and measurements of intraovarian and intrauterine vascularization on basal ultrasound examination in spontaneous ovulatory and anovulatory cycles]

BACKGROUND/AIM

Any organs functioning directly depends on vascularization. It applies also to the uterus and ovary which go through changes of vascularization during a menstruation cycle. The aim of this investigation was to determine differences in intrauterine and ovarian stromal arterioral blood flow on basal ultrasound examination (day 2-4) between spontaneous ovulatory and anovulatory cycles.

METHODS

This prospective clinical investigation included 205 patients divided into two groups: with ovulatory and with anovulatory cycles.

RESULTS

Resistance to ovarian arterioral stromal blood flow was significantly lower in the patients with ovulatory cycles (pulsatile index--PI 0.97 +/- 0.4 vs 1.93 +/- 1.37; p = 0.001737; and (resistance index - RI 0.55 +/- 0.12 vs 0.68 +/- 0.14; p = 0.040033). There. were no statistically significant differences in arcuate arterioral blood flow in the pateints with ovulatory and anovulatory cycles (PI 1.21 +/- 0.34 vs 61 +/- 0,61 p = 0.136161 and RI 0.64 +/- 0.11 vs 0.74 +/- 0.07; p = 0.136649). The patients with ovulatory cycles had lower uterine radial arterioral blood flow than the patients with anovulatory cycles (PI 1.001 +/- 0.22 vs 1.61 +/- 0.23 p = 0.007501 and RI 0.55 +/- 0.08 vs 0.71 +/- 0.12; p = 0,0460113). The patients with ovulatory cycles had lower subendometrial arterioral blood flow resistance (PI 0.69 0.19 vs 1.385 +/- 0.09; p = 0.00622 and RI 0.44 +/- 0.09 vs 0.65 +/- 0.02; p = 0.027458).

CONCLUSION

Color Doppler ultrasuond imaging and measurements of intrauterine and ovarian stromal arterioral blood flow on basal ultrasound examination (day 2-4), showed lower resistance to blood flow in ovulatory than in anovulatory cycles.

[Premature ovarian failure: which protocols?]

This review shows the results of the various studies concerning the protocols applied to the women presenting a premature ovarian failure. Will be thus analyzed the natural cycles (or semi-natural), the increase in the dose of gonadotrophins, the clomiphene citrate and the anti-aromatases, the protocols with GnRH agonists long, short, stop or microdoses, the protocols with GnRH antagonists and the adjuvant treatments: aspirin, nitric oxyde, recombinant LH recombining, growth hormone and androgens. The interest of several protocols is to collect a sufficient number of oocytes (and thus of embryos to be transferred), making it possible to obtain reasonable rates of pregnancy. However, it arises that the rates of pregnancy observed among these women depend not only on their ovarian reserve and their age, but are also function of the type of infertility, of the cycle number and the uterus.

Low-dose aspirin use does not improve in vitro fertilization outcomes in poor responders

OBJECTIVE

To assess if aspirin improves pregnancy outcome in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF) with a diagnosis of poor response.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort analysis.

SETTING

Academic private practice.

PATIENT(S)

1250 poor-responder patients undergoing IVF.

INTERVENTION(S)

Low-dose (81 mg) aspirin before and during an IVF cycle.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Live-birth rate.

RESULT(S)

Patients taking 81 mg of aspirin had statistically significantly higher basal antral follicle counts, more days of stimulation, more ampules of gonadotropins used, higher peak estradiol levels, and more follicles that were > or = 14 mm in diameter on the day of human chorionic gonadotropin administration. There was a decrease in the overall fertilization rate for the patients taking aspirin. There was no difference in IVF outcome rates (implantation, pregnancy, loss, or live birth).

CONCLUSION(S)

Patients with a diagnosis of poor response who were taking a regimen of 81 of mg aspirin showed an increase in many IVF stimulation parameters and a decrease in fertilization rates. No improvement secondary to 81-mg aspirin intake was found in IVF outcome rates.

Different ovarian stimulation protocols for women with diminished ovarian reserve

PURPOSE

To review the available treatments for women with significantly diminished ovarian reserve and assess the efficacy of different ovarian stimulation protocols.

METHODS

Literature research performed among studies that have been published in the Pubmed, in the Scopus Search Machine and in Cohrane database of systematic reviews.

RESULTS

A lack of clear, uniform definition of the poor responders and a lack of large-scale randomized studies make data interpretation very difficult for precise conclusions. Optimistic data have been presented by the use of high doses of gonadotropins, flare up Gn RH-a protocol (standard or microdose), stop protocols, luteal onset of Gn RH-a and the short protocol. Natural cycle or a modified natural cycle seems to be an appropriate strategy. Low dose hCG in the first days of ovarian stimulation has promising results. Molecular biology tools (mutations, single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs)) have been also considered to assist the management of this group of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The ideal stimulation for these patients with diminished ovarian reserve remains a great challenge for the clinician, within the limits of our pharmaceutical quiver.

Low-dose aspirin for in vitro fertilisation

BACKGROUND

Low-dose aspirin is sometimes used to improve the outcome in women undergoing in vitro fertilisation, despite inconsistent evidence of efficacy and the potential risk of significant side affects. The most appropriate time to commence aspirin therapy and length of treatment required is also still to be determined.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of low-dose aspirin for improving the outcome of in vitro fertilisation and intracytoplasmic sperm injection treatment cycles.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Trials Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (April 2007), MEDLINE (1966 to March 2007) and EMBASE (1980 to March 2007) databases using the following research terms: "(aspirin OR acetylsalicylic acid) AND (in-vitro fertilisation OR intracytoplasmic sperm injection)" combined with the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group's search strategy for identifying randomised controlled trials for reports which appeared to describe randomised controlled trials of low-dose aspirin for women undergoing in vitro fertilisation.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Prospective randomised controlled trials, published or unpublished, which addressed the objectives of the review. Quasi-randomised trials were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently selected studies to include in the review, extracted data and assessed trial quality.

MAIN RESULTS

The searches identified nine trials which were eligible for inclusion in the review, including a total of 1449 participants. No significant differences were found between the treatment and control groups for any of the outcomes assessed. Only two studies (involving 401 participants) investigated the effect of low-dose aspirin on live birth rate, and no significant difference was found between the treatment and control groups (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.39). No significant difference was found in clinical pregnancy rate between treatment and control groups, based on results from 1240 participants in seven studies (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.43). No data were reported on adverse events related to aspirin treatment in any of the included studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Use of low-dose aspirin for women undergoing in vitro fertilisation cannot currently be recommended due to lack of adequate trial data. There is a need for randomised controlled trials investigating the use of low-dose aspirin for different patient groups undergoing in vitro fertilisation. We used control group data from the largest trial included in this review to determine that a sample size of 350 women in each group would be required in order to demonstrate a 10% improvement from the use of aspirin with 80% power at the 5% significance level. Until evidence from appropriately powered trials is available, this treatment can not be recommended.

Aspirin in women undergoing in vitro fertilization treatment: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Many trials have evaluated the effects of aspirin in women undergoing IVF or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) treatment. These trials have generally shown inconclusive or inconsistent findings. We conducted a systematic review of trials of aspirin during IVF or ICSI treatment to generate more precise estimates of effects and attempt to explore the reasons for the inconsistencies.

DESIGN

A systematic review and meta-analysis.

SETTING

Assisted conception units in different countries.

PATIENT(S)

Seven trials including 1,241 women undergoing controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH), IVF, or ICSI and day 3 embryo transfer.

INTERVENTION(S)

Low-dose aspirin supplementation versus placebo or no supplementation.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Clinical pregnancy and live birth.

RESULT(S)

Searches were conducted in MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane Library, ISI Proceedings, and SCISEARCH, and all randomized controlled trials that evaluated the effectiveness of aspirin compared to placebo or no treatment in women undergoing IVF-ICSI treatment were included. Study selection, quality appraisal, and data extractions were performed independently and in duplicate. Seven relevant trials were identified. Meta-analysis of these studies did not show a significant benefit of aspirin therapy in improving clinical pregnancy rate (relative risk [RR] 1.11, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.95, 1.31) or live birth rate (RR 0.94, 95% CI 0.64, 1.39). There was no significant difference in miscarriage rate (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.53, 2.11) or ectopic pregnancy rate (RR 2.24, 95% CI 0.70, 7.24). An improvement was noted in uterine artery pulsatility index (weighted mean difference: -0.78, 95% CI -0.87, -0.69) in women taking low-dose aspirin. The evidence regarding other outcomes was either not significant or contradictory.

CONCLUSION(S)

Currently available evidence does not support the use of aspirin in IVF or ICSI treatment. However, the noted trend of improvement in clinical pregnancy, and the lack of power even when the studies were pooled highlight the need for a definitive trial.

Evidence of absence or absence of evidence? A reanalysis of the effects of low-dose aspirin in in vitro fertilization

OBJECTIVE

To assess the conflicting evidence whether low-dose aspirin is beneficial in IVF and to evaluate the meta-analysis performed by Gelbaya et al. and reported in March 2007 in Human Reproduction Update, in which they found no effects of low-dose aspirin and recommended discontinuing its use in IVF. We present a reanalysis of the effects of low-dose aspirin in IVF and raise methodological questions regarding the analysis by Gelbaya et al.

DESIGN

A meta-analysis of prospective randomized trials evaluating the effects of low-dose aspirin in IVF.

PATIENT(S)

Women undergoing IVF/intracytoplasmic sperm injection.

INTERVENTION(S)

Low-dose acetylsalicylic acid (aspirin).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Pregnancy rates, implantation rates, miscarriage rates.

RESULT(S)

Ten randomized clinical trials were included in the analysis. Clinical pregnancy rate per ET was significant when low-dose aspirin was compared with no treatment (risk ratio 1.15, 95% confidence interval 1.03-1.27). Nonsignificant estimates comparing low-dose aspirin with no treatment were found for implantation and miscarriage rates.

CONCLUSION(S)

Our results suggest that aspirin may increase clinical pregnancy rates and that more data are needed to resolve the issue. At this point, there is no reason to change clinical management and discontinue the use of aspirin.

En fécondation in vitro (FIV): pourquoi je ne stimule pas?

In vitro fertilization without stimulation, in natural or semi-natural cycles ("FIV-NAT") offers an interesting alternative to controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) for some patients. This protocol may be proposed to patients suffering from altered ovarian status (AOS) with encouraging results. The second indication might be patients presenting repeated implantation failure (IMF). FIV-NAT allows avoiding possible adverse effects of HOC on the endometrium. Results are respectively 15.4 and 16.6% clinical pregnancy rate per oocyte retrieval for AOS and IMF, and 25.5 and 26.3% over 3 cumulative cycles. This treatment is less expensive and patient friendly.

Poor responders in IVF: cancellation of a first cycle is not predictive of a subsequent failure

Management of women with a poor response to controlled ovarian hyperstimulation during IVF remains a frustrating challenge. The present study included 96 cycles from an equal number of women with a poor ovarian response and successful oocyte retrieval. Poor response was defined by the presence of at least one of the following characteristics: three or fewer oocytes on retrieval, serum estradiol level less than 500 pg/mL on the day of hCG administration, and serum FSH levels less than 20 IU/L. The same patients had a previous cycle cancelled because of a poor ovarian response whereas in the second cycle they preferred to continue the treatment despite the poor prognosis. We obtained 241 oocytes in the 96 IVF cycles. The fertilization rate was 60.2%. Three oocytes per cycle were retrieved in 56 cycles (58.3%), two oocytes per cycle in 33 cycles (34.4%), and one oocyte per cycle in 7 cycles (7.3%). In 19 cycles (19.8%) no fertilization was achieved. An embryo transfer was finally performed in 74 out of 96 cycles. Pregnancy rate was 12.5% per cycle and 16.2% per transfer. Among the 12 pregnancies achieved, 7 were in the 3-oocyte cycles and 5 in the 2-oocyte cycles. No pregnancies were achieved in the 1-oocyte cycles. Our data demonstrate that continuation of therapy in poor responders undergoing IVF can be an option despite the low pregnancy rates. The prognosis of these patients is not affected by a poor response in the first cycle and for some of them the outcome can be favorable.

Low-dose aspirin for in vitro fertilization: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Despite recent advances in ovarian stimulation regimens and laboratory techniques, the pregnancy rate of assisted reproduction remains relatively low. New methods that would potentially improve implantation rates are needed. One proposed strategy involves enhancement of blood flow at the implantation site with the use of low-dose aspirin. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to investigate the effect of low-dose aspirin on likelihood of pregnancy in women undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF)/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). An electronic search of the literature was conducted targeting reports published over the last 26 years. Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing aspirin with placebo or no treatment in IVF/ICSI women were included in the meta-analysis. A number of relevant outcomes including pregnancy and live birth (LB) rates were investigated. Pooled relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using a random-effects model. Inter-study heterogeneity among the trials was assessed using the Cochran's Q test. Ten RCTs were identified from the literature search, six of which met the criteria for inclusion in the meta-analysis. Clinical pregnancy (CP) rate per embryo transfer (ET) was not found to be significantly different between patients who received low-dose aspirin and those who received placebo or no treatment (RR 1.09, 95% CI 0.92-1.29). None of the other outcomes, including CP per cycle, spontaneous abortion or ectopic pregnancy per CP and LB rate per cycle or ET was found to differ significantly between the compared groups. On the basis of up-to-date evidence, low-dose aspirin has no substantial positive effect on likelihood of pregnancy and, therefore, it should not be routinely recommended for women undergoing IVF/ICSI.

Interventions for 'poor responders' to controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) in in-vitro fertilisation (IVF)

BACKGROUND

The success of in-vitro fertilisation (IVF) treatment depends on adequate follicle recruitment by using controlled ovarian stimulation with gonadotrophins. Failure to recruit adequate follicles is called 'poor response'. Various treatment protocols have been proposed that are targeted at this cohort of women, aiming to increase their ovarian response.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the effectiveness of different treatment interventions in women who have poor response to controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (are poor responders) in the context of in vitro fertilisation.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Specialised Register of controlled trials (MDSG), the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2003, Issue 1), MEDLINE (1966 to August 2006), EMBASE (1980 to August 2006) and The National Research Register (NRR). The citation lists of relevant publications, review articles, abstracts of scientific meetings and included studies were also searched. The authors were contacted to identify or clarify data that were unclear from the trial reports.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Only randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing one type of intervention versus another for controlled ovarian stimulation of poor responders to a previous IVF treatment, using a standard long protocol were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently scanned the abstracts, identified relevant papers, assessed inclusion and trial quality and extracted relevant data. Validity was assessed in terms of method of randomisation, completeness of treatment cycle and co-intervention. Where possible, data were pooled for analysis.

MAIN RESULTS

Nine trials involving six different comparison groups have been included in this review. Only one trial reported live birth rates. Four groups compared the long protocol with another intervention. Only one comparison group (bromocryptine versus long protocol) reported a higher clinical pregnancy rate per cycle, in the bromocryptine arm (OR 5.60, 95% CI 1.40 to 22.47). Two comparison groups showed a lower number of oocytes in the long protocol group (versus stop and gonadotrophin releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocols). However, two comparison groups also showed lower cancellation rates in the long protocol treatment group (versus stop and GnRHa flare-up protocols). None reported any evident difference in the adverse effects.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence to support the routine use of any particular intervention either for pituitary downregulation, ovarian stimulation or adjuvant therapy in the management of poor responders to controlled ovarian stimulation in IVF. More robust data from good quality RCTs with relevant outcomes are needed.

[The follicular flushing duplicate the pregnancy rate on semi natural cycle IVF]

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the importance of follicular flushing on semi natural cycle IVF.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We have compared prospectively the reproductive potential of oocytes obtained from follicular fluid (LF, N = 79) to those obtained from follicular flushing (R, N = 47) in 146 oocyte pick ups.

RESULTS

The group LF and R were similar with regard to fertilization rate (79.7 versus 88.1%, respectively), percentage of superior grade embryos (28.8 versus 37.8%) and implantation rate (24.1 versus 44.1%).

CONCLUSION

The practice of follicular flushing on semi natural IVF cycle improves the pregnancy rate. The oocytes obtained by follicular flushing had the same reproductive potential than those obtained on follicular fluid.

In vitro fertilization and embryo transfer in seminatural cycles for patients with ovarian aging

OBJECTIVE

To investigate whether seminatural cycle is a reasonable management for ovarian aging patients.

DESIGN

Prospective study.

SETTING

ART Unit, Clamart, France.

PATIENT(S)

Seventy-five women, 158 cycles.

INTERVENTION(S)

Infertile women who presented with ovarian aging (defined as low ovarian reserve and characterized by cycle day 3 high FSH, high E2, and/or low inhibin B and/or previous cycle cancellations due to poor ovarian response to COH) were studied. Patients were offered up to three cycles. Treatment was scheduled as follows. From cycle day 8 onward the selection of the dominant follicle was monitored by ultrasound and hormonal measurements. When the dominant follicle appeared, patients received GnRH antagonist and, thereafter, hMG to support further follicular development.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Implantation rate and clinical pregnancy.

RESULT(S)

Twenty-eight of 158 cycles were cancelled (17.7%). Oocyte pickups were performed in 119 (75.3%) cycles, 91 (57.6%) mature oocytes were retrieved, and 67 (42.4%) embryos transferred. Nineteen clinical pregnancies were obtained; the cumulative pregnancy rate per patient, after 3 cycles, was 35.2%.

CONCLUSION(S)

Use of a seminatural cycle is a reasonable management for patients with ovarian aging who have ovulatory menstrual cycles. It achieves a high implantation rate (28.3%).