• Features of the course of pregnancy and prenatal outcomes in patients with reduced ovarian response in assisted reproductive technology programs

Features of the course of pregnancy and prenatal outcomes in patients with reduced ovarian response in assisted reproductive technology programs

HEALTH OF WOMAN. 2018.10(136):96–100; doi 10.15574/HW.2018.136.96

Strelko G. V.
Medical Center «IVMED Rodynne dzherelo», Kyiv

The objective: a retrospective analysis of the course of pregnancy and perinatal outcomes in women with a reduced response to stimulation in assisted reproductive technology (ART) programs in comparison with spontaneous pregnancies.

Materials and methods. We examined 278 patients with infertility with a reduced response to stimulation (poor responders) according to the 2011 Bologna criteria, with further retrospective studies of the course of pregnancy and perinatal outcomes, such as preterm birth, low birth weight, gestational diabetes, pre-eclampsia, in 50 patients whose pregnancy was achieved using their own oocytes after developed programs of controlled ovarian stimulation, and in 87 pregnant women after using donor oocytes (TO). The course of the gestational period in women after ART programs has been compared with over 35 spontaneous pregnancies.

Results. The course of the first trimester-induced pregnancy with both own oocytes and DO is accompanied by a large percentage of complications compared with spontaneous pregnancies, namely, the threat of termination of pregnancy, early toxicosis and early loss of pregnancies. As for the ІІ and ІІІ trimesters of pregnancy, the course of induced pregnancy was accompanied by a smaller percentage of complications in comparison with the spontaneous one. However, the frequency of preterm labor in patients — poor responders after applying ART programs — was statistically significantly higher than in women with spontaneous pregnancies.

Conclusion. Women who are poor respondents with induced pregnancy are at high risk for the frequency of complications in the first trimester of gestation and for cases of premature birth with the birth of children with low body weight.

Key words: women – poor responders, pregnancy, perinatal outcomes, assisted reproductive technologies.

REFERENCES

1. Aleksandrova NV, Marchenko LA. 2007. Sovremennyie podhodyi k otsenke ovarialnogo rezerva u zhenschin s prezhdevremennoy nedostatochnostyu yaichnikov. Problemyi reproduktsii 2:22–29.

2. Babenko IV. 2013. Dyferentsiinyi pidkhid do likuvannia bezplidnosti v dopomizhnykh reproduktyvnykh tekhnolohiiakh u pohanykh vidpovidachiv. Pediatriia, akusherstvo ta ginekolohiia 76;4:69–72.

3. Dankovich NA, Vorobey-Vihovskaya VN. Prichinyi i formyi besplodiya. Sovremennyie vozmozhnosti diagnostiki i lecheniya. Zdorove zhenschiny 3:192–197.

4. Kvinan DT, Khobbins DS, Sponh KU. 2009. Protokoly dlia vahitnostei vysokoho ryzyku. K, Feniks:792.

5. Maslii YuV, Sudoma IO, Livshyts HB. 2006. Biokhimichni markery yaiechnykovoho rezervu u patsiientiv iz syndromom slabkoi vidpovidi na stymuliatsiiu honadotropinamy v tsyklakh dopomizhnykh reproduktyvnykh tekhnolohii. Zdorove zhenshchynы 3(27):126–131.

6. Maslii YuV, Sudoma IO, Livshyts HB. 2006. Etiopatohenetychni chynnyky syndromu slabkoi vidpovidi yaiechnykiv v tsyklakh dopomizhnykh reproduktyvnykh tekhnolohii. Zdorove zhenshchynу 4(28):152–157.

7. Mishieva NG. 2010. Besplodie u zhenschin pozdnego reproduktivnogo vozrasta: printsipyi diagnostiki i lecheniya v zavisimosti ot ovarialnogo rezerva. Diss. d-ra med. nauk: 14.00.01. M:272.

8. Sidelnikova VM. 2009. Endokrinologiya beremennosti v norme i pri patologii. M, MEDpress-inform:351.

9. Yuzko OM, Yuzko TA, Rudenko NH. 2013. Stan ta perspektyvy vykorystannia dopomizhnykh reproduktyvnykh tekhnolohii pry likuvanni bezpliddia v Ukraini. Zdorove zhenshchyny 8:26–30.

10. Benaglia L, Somigliana E, Vighi V, Ragni G, Vercellini P, Fedele L. 2010. Rate of severe ovarian damage following surgery for endometriomas. Human Reproduction. 25;3:678–682. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dep464; PMid:20083485

11. Ben-Rafael Z, Bider D, Dan U, Zolti M, Levran D, Mashiach S. 1991. Combined gonadotropin releasing hormone agonist/human menopausal gonadotropin therapy (GnRH-a/hMG) in normal, high, and poor responders to hMG. Journal of In Vitro Fertilization and Embryo Transfer. 8;1:33–36. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01131588; PMid:1826724

12. Faddy MJ, Gosden RG, Gougeon A, Richardson SJ, Nelson JF. 1992. Accelerated disappearance of ovarian follicles in mid-life: implications for forecasting menopause. Human Reproduction. 7;10:1342–1346. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a137570

13. Ferraretti AP, La Marca AB, Fauser CJM, Tarlatzis B, Nargund G, Gianaroli L. 2011. ESHRE consensus on the definition of “poor response” to ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: the Bologna criteria. Human Reproduction. 26;7:1616–1624. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/der092; PMid:21505041

14. Jenkins JM, Davies DW, Devonport H, Anthony FW, Gadd SC. 1991. Comparison of “poor” responders with “good” responders using a standard buserelin/human menopausal gonadotrophin regime for in-vitro fertilization. Human Reproduction. 6;7:918–921. View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a137459

15. Keay SD, Liversedge NH, Mathur RS, Jenkins JM. 1997. Assisted conception following poor ovarian response to gonadotrophin stimulation. The British Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. 104;5:521–527. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.1997.tb11525.x; PMid:9166190

16. Kolibianakis EM, Venetis CA, Diedrich K, Tarlatzis BC, Griesinger G. 2009. Addition of growth hormone to gonadotrophins in ovarian stimulation of poor responders treated by in-vitro fertilization: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Human Reproduction Update. 15;6:613–622. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmp026; PMid:19561136

17. Polyzos NP, Devroey P. 2011. A systematic review of randomized trials for the treatment of poor ovarian responders: is there any light at the end of the tunnel. Fertility and Sterility. 96;5:1058.e7–1061.e7. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.09.048; PMid:22036048

18. Surrey ES, Schoolcraft WB. 2000. Evaluating strategies for improving ovarian response of the poor responder undergoing assisted reproductive techniques. Fertility and Sterility. 73;4:667–676. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(99)00630-5

19. Ziegler D, Borghese B, Chapron C. 2010. Endometriosis and infertility: pathophysiology and management. The Lancet. 376;9742:730–738. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(10)60490-4