Marchante M, Barrachina F, Piechota S, Fernandez-González M, Giovannini A, Smith T, Kats S, Paulsen B, González E, Calvente V, Silvan A, Abittan B, Klein J, Klatsky P, Ordonez D, Kramme CC. Donor side effects experienced under minimal controlled ovarian stimulation with in vitro maturation vs. conventional controlled ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization treatment.
F&S SCIENCE 2024;
5:242-251. [PMID:
38838957 DOI:
10.1016/j.xfss.2024.05.002]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/26/2024] [Revised: 05/22/2024] [Accepted: 05/23/2024] [Indexed: 06/07/2024]
Abstract
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate oocyte retrieval experiences and side effects under minimally controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) treatment for in vitro maturation (IVM) of oocytes compared with conventional COS treatment.
DESIGN
A retrospective survey study.
SETTING
Clinical in vitro fertilization treatment center.
PATIENT(S)
Data were collected from subjects undergoing minimal COS treatment (n = 110; 600-800 IU follicle-stimulating hormone) for IVM of oocytes and conventional COS treatment for egg donation (n = 48; 1,800-2,600 IU follicle-stimulating hormone) from April 2022 to November 2023.
INTERVENTION(S)
Minimal and conventional COS treatments.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)
The most common side effects experienced during ovarian stimulation and after oocyte pick-up, satisfaction level, and the likelihood of recommending or repeating minimal or conventional COS. Statistical analysis included Mann-Whitney U test and χ2 tests, with a significance level.
RESULT(S)
During minimal COS treatment, most subjects did not experience breast swelling (86%), pelvic or abdominal pain (76%), nausea or vomiting (96%), and bleeding (96%). After oocyte pick-up, the majority (75%) reported no pelvic or abdominal pain. The most common side effect was abdominal swelling (52%). Compared with conventional COS cycles, minimal COS subjects reported significantly less postretrieval pain, with 33% experiencing no pain (vs. 6%) and with a reduced severe level of pain (5% vs. 19%), leading to fewer subjects requiring pain medication (25% vs. 54%). Additionally, 85% of women were very satisfied with minimal stimulation treatment and would recommend or repeat the treatment.
CONCLUSION(S)
Reducing the hormonal dose for ovarian stimulation has a beneficial effect on subjects, suggesting the combination of minimal COS treatment with IVM techniques is a well-tolerated alternative for women who cannot or do not wish to undergo conventionally controlled ovarian hyperstimulation treatment.
Collapse