SpringerLink
Log in

Conventional Controlled Ovarian Stimulation Protocols for Diminished Ovarian Reserve Patients and Poor Responders

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Diminished Ovarian Reserve and Assisted Reproductive Technologies

  • 639 Accesses

Abstract

Poor ovarian response has been a challenging problem during controlled ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization. Microdose flare gonadotropin agonist protocol used to be the mainstay for these patients until gonadotropin releasing hormone antagonists became available, and there was debate as to which protocol was better. In the past decade, many new and fascinatingly innovative ideas have been proposed and tried on these patients with no protocol emerging as the most effective. In this chapter, we will review the evidence for the efficacy of the conventional IVF protocols and examine the role of gonadotropin dose, adjuvants, double trigger, follicular flushing, and freezing all embryos in adding to the success rate.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
EUR 32.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or Ebook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Chapter
EUR 29.95
Price includes VAT (Thailand)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
EUR 85.59
Price includes VAT (Thailand)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
EUR 99.99
Price excludes VAT (Thailand)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free ship** worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
EUR 139.99
Price excludes VAT (Thailand)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free ship** worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Patrizio P, Vaiarelli A, Levi Setti PE, Tobler KJ, Shoham G, Leong M, et al. How to define, diagnose and treat poor responders? Responses from a worldwide survey of IVF clinics. Reprod Biomed Online. 2015;30(6):581–92.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Papathanasiou A, Searle BJ, King NM, Bhattacharya S. Trends in ‘poor responder’ research: lessons learned from RCTs in assisted conception. Hum Reprod Update. 2016;22(3):306–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Yakin K, Oktem O, Balaban B, Urman B. Bologna criteria are predictive for ovarian response and live birth in subsequent ovarian stimulation cycles. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2019;299(2):571–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Comparison of pregnancy rates for poor responders using IVF with mild ovarian stimulation versus conventional IVF: a guideline. Fertil Steril. 2018;109(6):993–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Check JH, Slovis B. Choosing the right stimulation protocol for in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer in poor, normal, and hyper-responders. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol. 2011;38(4):313–7.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Busnelli A, Papaleo E, Del Prato D, La Vecchia I, Iachini E, Paffoni A, et al. A retrospective evaluation of prognosis and cost-effectiveness of IVF in poor responders according to the Bologna criteria. Hum Reprod. 2015;30(2):315–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Giovanale V, Pulcinelli FM, Ralli E, Primiero FM, Caserta D. Poor responders in IVF: an update in therapy. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2015;31(4):253–7.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Polat M, Bozdag G, Yarali H. Best protocol for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in assisted reproductive technologies: fact or opinion? Semin Reprod Med. 2014;32(4):262–71.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Chai J, Lee VC, Yeung TW, Li HW, Ho PC, Ng EH. Live birth and cumulative live birth rates in expected poor ovarian responders defined by the Bologna criteria following IVF/ICSI treatment. PLoS One. 2015;10(3):e0119149.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Polyzos NP, Nwoye M, Corona R, Blockeel C, Stoop D, Haentjens P, et al. Live birth rates in Bologna poor responders treated with ovarian stimulation for IVF/ICSI. Reprod Biomed Online. 2014;28(4):469–74.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Ke H, Chen X, Liu YD, Ye DS, He YX, Chen SL. Cumulative live birth rate after three ovarian stimulation IVF cycles for poor ovarian responders according to the bologna criteria. J Huazhong Univ Sci Technolog Med Sci. 2013;33(3):418–22.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Sefrioui O, Madkour A, Aboulmaouahib S, Kaarouch I, Louanjli N. Women with extreme low AMH values could have in vitro fertilization success. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2019;35(2):170–3.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Xu B, Chen Y, Geerts D, Yue J, Li Z, Zhu G, et al. Cumulative live birth rates in more than 3,000 patients with poor ovarian response: a 15-year survey of final in vitro fertilization outcome. Fertil Steril. 2018;109(6):1051–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Gonda KJ, Domar AD, Gleicher N, Marrs RP. Insights from clinical experience in treating IVF poor responders. Reprod Biomed Online. 2018;36(1):12–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Busnelli A, Somigliana E. Prognosis and cost-effectiveness of IVF in poor responders according to the Bologna criteria. Minerva Ginecol. 2018;70(1):89–98.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Bozdag G, Polat M, Yarali I, Yarali H. Live birth rates in various subgroups of poor ovarian responders fulfilling the Bologna criteria. Reprod Biomed Online. 2017;34(6):639–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Magnusson Å, Nilsson L, Oleröd G, Thurin-Kjellberg A, Bergh C. The addition of anti-Müllerian hormone in an algorithm for individualized hormone dosage did not improve the prediction of ovarian response-a randomized, controlled trial. Hum Reprod. 2017;32(4):811–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. van Tilborg TC, Broekmans FJ, Dólleman M, Eijkemans MJ, Mol BW, Laven JS, et al. Individualized follicle-stimulating hormone dosing and in vitro fertilization outcome in agonist downregulated cycles: a systematic review. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2016;95(12):1333–44.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Lensen SF, Wilkinson J, Leijdekkers JA, La Marca A, Mol BWJ, Marjoribanks J, et al. Individualised gonadotropin dose selection using markers of ovarian reserve for women undergoing in vitro fertilisation plus intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI). Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018;2:CD012693.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Friedler S, Meltzer S, Saar-Ryss B, Rabinson J, Lazer T, Liberty G. An upper limit of gonadotropin dose in patients undergoing ART should be advocated. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2016;32(12):965–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Lefebvre J, Antaki R, Kadoch IJ, Dean NL, Sylvestre C, Bissonnette F, et al. 450 IU versus 600 IU gonadotropin for controlled ovarian stimulation in poor responders: a randomized controlled trial. Fertil Steril. 2015;104(6):1419–25.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. Haas J, Zilberberg E, Machtinger R, Kedem A, Hourvitz A, Orvieto R. Do poor-responder patients benefit from increasing the daily gonadotropin dose during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation for IVF? Gynecol Endocrinol. 2015;31(1):79–82.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Dakhly DMR, Bassiouny YA, Bayoumi YA, Hassan MA, Gouda HM, Hassan AA. The addition of growth hormone adjuvant therapy to the long down regulation protocol in poor responders undergoing in vitro fertilization: randomized control trial. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2018;228:161–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Li XL, Wang L, Lv F, Huang XM, Wang LP, Pan Y, et al. The influence of different growth hormone addition protocols to poor ovarian responders on clinical outcomes in controlled ovary stimulation cycles: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Medicine (Baltimore). 2017;96(12):e6443.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Yu X, Ruan J, He LP, Hu W, Xu Q, Tang J, et al. Efficacy of growth hormone supplementation with gonadotrophins in vitro fertilization for poor ovarian responders: an updated meta-analysis. Int J Clin Exp Med. 2015;8(4):4954–67.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Dakhly DM, Bayoumi YA, Gad Allah SH. Which is the best IVF/ICSI protocol to be used in poor responders receiving growth hormone as an adjuvant treatment? A prospective randomized trial. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2016;32(2):116–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Doan HT, Quan LH, Nguyen TT. The effectiveness of transdermal testosterone gel 1% (androgel) for poor responders undergoing in vitro fertilization. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2017;33(12):977–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Bosdou JK, Venetis CA, Dafopoulos K, Zepiridis L, Chatzimeletiou K, Anifandis G, et al. Transdermal testosterone pretreatment in poor responders undergoing ICSI: a randomized clinical trial. Hum Reprod. 2016;31(5):977–85.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  29. Kim CH, Ahn JW, Moon JW, Kim SH, Chae HD, Kang BM. Ovarian features after 2 weeks, 3 weeks and 4 weeks transdermal testosterone gel treatment and their associated effect on IVF outcomes in poor responders. Dev Reprod. 2014;18(3):145–52.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Nagels HE, Rishworth JR, Siristatidis CS, Kroon B. Androgens (dehydroepiandrosterone or testosterone) for women undergoing assisted reproduction. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;(11):CD009749.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Kasum M, Kurdija K, Orešković S, Čehić E, Pavičić-Baldani D, Škrgatić L. Combined ovulation triggering with GnRH agonist and hCG in IVF patients. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2016;32(11):861–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Haas J, Zilberberg E, Nahum R, Mor Sason A, Hourvitz A, Gat I, et al. Does double trigger (GnRH-agonist + hCG) improve outcome in poor responders undergoing IVF-ET cycle? A pilot study. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2019;35(7):628–30.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Mok-Lin E, Brauer AA, Schattman G, Zaninovic N, Rosenwaks Z, Spandorfer S. Follicular flushing and in vitro fertilization outcomes in the poorest responders: a randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod. 2013;28(11):2990–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Haydardedeoglu B, Gjemalaj F, Aytac PC, Kilicdag EB. Direct aspiration versus follicular flushing in poor responders undergoing intracytoplasmic sperm injection: a randomised controlled trial. BJOG. 2017;124(8):1190–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  35. von Horn K, Depenbusch M, Schultze-Mosgau A, Griesinger G. Randomized, open trial comparing a modified double-lumen needle follicular flushing system with a single-lumen aspiration needle in IVF patients with poor ovarian response. Hum Reprod. 2017;32(4):832–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Berkkanoglu M, Coetzee K, Bulut H, Ozgur K. Optimal embryo transfer strategy in poor response may include freeze-all. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2017;34(1):79–87.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Roque M, Valle M, Sampaio M, Geber S. Does freeze-all policy affect IVF outcome in poor ovarian responders? Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2018;52(4):530–4.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Xue Y, Tong X, Zhu H, Li K, Zhang S. Freeze-all embryo strategy in poor ovarian responders undergoing ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2018;34(8):680–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. Quinquin M, Mialon O, Isnard V, Massin N, Parinaud J, Delotte J, et al. In vitro fertilization versus conversion to intrauterine insemination in Bologna-criteria poor responders: how to decide which option? Fertil Steril. 2014;102(6):1596–601.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Sunkara SK, Coomarasamy A, Faris R, Braude P, Khalaf Y. Long gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist versus short agonist versus antagonist regimens in poor responders undergoing in vitro fertilization: a randomized controlled trial. Fertil Steril. 2014;101(1):147–53.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  41. Prapas Y, Petousis S, Dagklis T, Panagiotidis Y, Papatheodorou A, Assunta I, et al. GnRH antagonist versus long GnRH agonist protocol in poor IVF responders: a randomized clinical trial. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2013;166(1):43–6.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Pu D, Wu J, Liu J. Comparisons of GnRH antagonist versus GnRH agonist protocol in poor ovarian responders undergoing IVF. Hum Reprod. 2011;26(10):2742–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  43. Shastri SM, Barbieri E, Kligman I, Schoyer KD, Davis OK, Rosenwaks Z. Stimulation of the young poor responder: comparison of the luteal estradiol/gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist priming protocol versus oral contraceptive microdose leuprolide. Fertil Steril. 2011;95(2):592–5.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  44. Chang EM, Han JE, Won HJ, Kim YS, Yoon TK, Lee WS. Effect of estrogen priming through luteal phase and stimulation phase in poor responders in in-vitro fertilization. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2012;29(3):225–30.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Cakmak H, Tran ND, Zamah AM, Cedars MI, Rosen MP. A novel “delayed start” protocol with gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist improves outcomes in poor responders. Fertil Steril. 2014;101(5):1308–14.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Davar R, Neghab N, Naghshineh E. Pregnancy outcome in delayed start antagonist versus microdose flare GnRH agonist protocol in poor responders undergoing IVF/ICSI: an RCT. Int J Reprod Biomed (Yazd). 2018;16(4):255–60.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. DiLuigi AJ, Engmann L, Schmidt DW, Benadiva CA, Nulsen JC. A randomized trial of microdose leuprolide acetate protocol versus luteal phase ganirelix protocol in predicted poor responders. Fertil Steril. 2011;95(8):2531–3.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Rochester Medical Center, Rochester, NY, USA

    Bala Bhagavath

Authors
  1. Bala Bhagavath
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Bala Bhagavath .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center, Dallas, TX, USA

    Orhan Bukulmez

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Bhagavath, B. (2020). Conventional Controlled Ovarian Stimulation Protocols for Diminished Ovarian Reserve Patients and Poor Responders. In: Bukulmez, O. (eds) Diminished Ovarian Reserve and Assisted Reproductive Technologies. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-23235-1_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-23235-1_8

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-030-23234-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-030-23235-1

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation