• The effectiveness of tubal infertility treatment in ART programs depending on ovarian stimulation protocol
en To content

The effectiveness of tubal infertility treatment in ART programs depending on ovarian stimulation protocol

HEALTH OF WOMAN. 2017.9(125):114–116; doi 10.15574/HW.2017.125.114

Bagatko O. V., Dankovich N. O.
Medical Center «Mother and Child», Kyiv

The objective: of the investigation was to study the effectiveness of treatment of women with tubal infertility, depending on the protocol of ovarian stimulation.
Materials and methods. To achieve tht goal, the medical documentation of patients who contacted the «Mother and Child» Medical Center in 2012-2013 was analyzed. To compare the efficacy of different ovarian stimulation protocols were selected 387 patients under the age of 35 years with tubal infertility, who were stimulated by standard protocols with further separation into two groups: S (short stimulation protocol, n=246) and L (long stimulation protocol, n=141). In both groups, an intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) was performed.
Results.The mean duration of stimulation in a long protocol was on 2 days longer. The total amount of spent rFSH was also significantly (by 300 IU) more. There was no significant difference between the number of blastocysts and high quality blastocysts. The cumulative efficacy of treatment after 1 year was 82.33% and 77.30% (p>0.05).
Conclusion. The retrospective study showed that women with tubal infertility in a long protocol require a longer stimulation, using a larger total dose of recombinant FSH, with the same end-point effectiveness.
Key words: tubal peritoneal infertility, in vitro fertilization, stimulation of superovulation, treatment effectiveness.

1. Avramenko NV, Barkovskiy DE. 2010. Aspects of reproductive health in Ukraine. Zaporozhskiy meditsinskiy zhurnal 3(12):71-73.

2. Gynecology: a textbook, pod red.V.E. Radzinskogo, A.M. Fuksa. M, GEOTARMedia, 2014:1000.

3. Grischenko MG. 2007. Infertile marriage. Message 1. Use of assisted reproductive technologies in the treatment of infertility. Meditsinskaya psihologiya 2(4):98-104.

4. Clinical Practice in Reproductive Medicine: A Guide for Physicians. pod red. V.N. Lokshina, T.M. Dzhusubalievoy. Almatyi:MedMedia Kazahstan. 2015: 464.

5. Laboratory of SINEVO: pod red. Nebyiltsovoy O.V. K, LLC «Doktor5Media». 2011: 420.

6. Monahova IV, Zdanovskiy VM, Nazarenko TA. 2012. The use of gonadotropin-releasing hormone. Vesnik NGU. Seriya: Biologiya, klinicheskaya meditsina. 10(2):186-191.

7. Shigantsova NV, Pushkar VA. 2011. Infertility problems in young women (Review of Literature). Vestnik obschestvennogo zdorovya i zdravoohraneniya Dalnego Vostoka Rossii. 4:1-14.

8. Yuzko AM. 2017. Female infertility of tubal origin (Literature review). Women's health. 2(118):126-131.

9. Pereira N, Pryor KP, Voskuilen-Gonzalez A, Lekovich JP, Elias RT, Spandorfer SD, Rosenwaks Z. 2017. Ovarian Response and in Vitro Fertilization Outcomes After Salpingectomy: Does Salpingectomy Indication Matter? J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 24(3):446-454. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jmig.2016.12.023; PMid:28069482