medigraphic.com
SPANISH

Acta Médica Grupo Angeles

Órgano Oficial del Hospital Angeles Health System
  • Contents
  • View Archive
  • Information
    • General Information        
    • Directory
  • Publish
    • Instructions for authors        
    • Send manuscript
    • Names and affiliations of the Editorial Board
  • Policies
  • About us
    • Data sharing policy
    • Stated aims and scope
  • medigraphic.com
    • Home
    • Journals index            
    • Register / Login
  • Mi perfil

2003, Number 4

<< Back Next >>

Acta Med 2003; 1 (4)

Comparative study on the usefulness of recombinant chorionic gonadotrophin vs urinary gonadotrophin in an assisted reproduction program

Ruiz AJ, Kably AA, Carballo ME, Quesnel GC, Karchmer KS
Full text How to cite this article

Language: Spanish
References: 11
Page: 203-209
PDF size: 71.64 Kb.


Key words:

In vitro fertilization, human chorionic gonadotrophin, induced ovulation.

ABSTRACT

Introduction: One of the objectives in stimulation programs for IVF (In Vitro Fertilization) is the use of recombinant drugs. During the last 25 years, the Human Chorionic Gonadotrophin (hCG) has been used as LH (Luteinizant Hormone) analogue in order to induce final follicular maturation and ovulation in assisted reproduction programs.
Objective: To compare the efficiency of urinary hCG (hCGu) vs recombinant hCG (hCGr) in inducing final follicular maturation, oocyte retrieval, fertilization, and pregnancy rates.
Material and methods: We include 197 patients in a retrospective study that have undergone IVF and used hCGu or hCGr. The analyzed variables were: oocyte quality and maturity, fertilization, pregnancy and oocyte retrieval rates. The statistical analysis was performed through “t” Student, and Mann-Whitney “U’.
Results: Both groups were compared: 1) hCGr (n = 72) and hCGu (n = 125). In the second group we observed an increase in the number of retrieved oocytes (10.68 vs 12.82; p ‹ 0.05). The oocyte quality and maturity was similar in both groups. No statistical difference was observed in fertilization (55.25% vs 56.54%; p = 0.557) or segmentation rates (80.77% vs 81.25%; p = 0.980). Pregnancy rates were similar in both groups (32% vs 28%, p = 0.179).
Discussion: There was no significant difference in the statistical analysis between groups. We only observed a better oocyte retrieval per patient in the hCGu group. Finally, we suggest that the recombinant hCG does not offer better results than the urinary hCG.


REFERENCES

  1. Speroff L, Glass RH, Kase NG. Chapter 6 Regulation of the Menstrual Cycle. In: Speroff L, Glass RH, Kase NG eds. Clinical gynecologic endocrinology and infertility. 4th edition. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1989.

  2. Rebar RW. Chap 9 The normal Menstrual cycle. In: Keye WR, Chang RJ, Rebar RW, Soules MR eds. Infertility evaluation and treatment. Philadelphia: Saunders Co., 1995: 85-97.

  3. Yoshimura Y, Sentulli R, Aflos SJ, Fuji S. The effects of proteolytic enzymes on in vitro ovulation in the rabitt. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1987; 157: 468-73.

  4. Chang P, Kenley S, Burns T, Denton G, Currie K, DeVane G, O´Dea L et al. Recombinant Human chorionic gonadotrophin (rhCG) in assisted reproductive technology: Results of a clinical trial comparing two dose of rhCG (Ovidrel®) to urinary hCG (Profasi®) for induction of final follicular maturation in in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer. Fertil Steril 2001; 76: 67-74.

  5. The International Recombinant Chorionic Gonadotrophin Study Group. Induction ovulation in World Health Organization group II anovulatory women undergoing follicular stimulation with recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone: A comparison of recombinant human chorionic gonadotrophin (rhCG) and urinary hCG. Fertil Steril 2001; 75: 1111-8.

  6. The European Recombinant Human Chorionic Gonadotrophin study Group. Induction of final follicular maturation and early luteinization in women undergoing ovulation induction for assisted reproduction treatment- rhCG versus urinary hCG. Hum Reprod 2000; 15: 1446-51.

  7. Driscoll GL, Tyler JP, Hangan JT, Fisher PR, Birdsall MA, Knight DC. A prospective randomized controlled doubled blind, double dummy comparison of recombinant and urinary hCG for inducing oocyte maturation and follicular luteinization in ovarian stimulation. Hum Reprod 2000; 15: 1305-10.

  8. De Vries J. Section 5: The oocyte/Practice. In: Bras M, Lens JW, Piederiet MH, Rijnders PM, Verveld M. IVF Lab Laboratory aspects of in vitro fertilization. Edit. Organon, 1996:95-110.

  9. Krysa LW, Thorsell LP, Iwazko M, Palmer M, Opsahl MS, Blauer KL. Metaphase II oocyte recovery using subcutaneous Ovidrel® versus subcutaneous hCG. Fertil Steril 2002; 78(Suppl 1): 252.

  10. Retzloff MG, Jackson KV, Fox JH, Ginsburg ES, Racowsky C. Use of recombinant hCG results in reduced IVF pregnancy rates compared to non-recombinant hCG. Fertil Steril 2002; 78(Suppl 1): 44.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com

Mi perfil

C?MO CITAR (Vancouver)

Acta Med. 2003;1