Effectiveness of HP-hMG versus r-FSH in patients undergoing IVF/ICSI cycles with moderate male-factor infertility

The aim of this case-control study was to compare the efficacy of highly purified human menopausal gonadotropin (HP-hMG) versus recombinant follicle stimulating hormone (r-FSH) treatments following gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist suppression in patients undergoing intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) with moderate male-factor infertility in terms of oocyte and embryo quality and clinical pregnancy outcomes. Materials and methods: A total of 240 infertile women were treated with HP-hMG (HP-hMG group, n = 120 patients) or r-FSH (r-FSH group, n = 120 patients) following GnRH agonist suppression (long regimen). Inclusion criteria for the study groups were infertility due to moderate oligoasthenoteratospermia with no associated female infertility factor, fewer than 2 previous assisted reproductive technology cycles, and female patients with ages between 19 and 35 years, normal basal FSH, regular ovulatory cycles, and body mass index below 30 kg/m2. Results: Treatment durations and gonadotropin doses were similar in both groups. Cycle cancellation rates, clinical pregnancy and miscarriage rates, total and metaphase II oocytes retrieved, fertilization rate, and number of embryos transferred were all similar in both groups. The clinical pregnancy rates were 45.9% (n = 50/109) in the r-FSH group and 40.4% (n = 44/109) in the HP-hMG group. Conclusion: HP-hMG is as effective as r-FSH in terms of oocyte and embryo quality and clinical pregnancy outcomes in patients undergoing ICSI with moderate male-factor infertility.

Effectiveness of HP-hMG versus r-FSH in patients undergoing IVF/ICSI cycles with moderate male-factor infertility

The aim of this case-control study was to compare the efficacy of highly purified human menopausal gonadotropin (HP-hMG) versus recombinant follicle stimulating hormone (r-FSH) treatments following gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist suppression in patients undergoing intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) with moderate male-factor infertility in terms of oocyte and embryo quality and clinical pregnancy outcomes. Materials and methods: A total of 240 infertile women were treated with HP-hMG (HP-hMG group, n = 120 patients) or r-FSH (r-FSH group, n = 120 patients) following GnRH agonist suppression (long regimen). Inclusion criteria for the study groups were infertility due to moderate oligoasthenoteratospermia with no associated female infertility factor, fewer than 2 previous assisted reproductive technology cycles, and female patients with ages between 19 and 35 years, normal basal FSH, regular ovulatory cycles, and body mass index below 30 kg/m2. Results: Treatment durations and gonadotropin doses were similar in both groups. Cycle cancellation rates, clinical pregnancy and miscarriage rates, total and metaphase II oocytes retrieved, fertilization rate, and number of embryos transferred were all similar in both groups. The clinical pregnancy rates were 45.9% (n = 50/109) in the r-FSH group and 40.4% (n = 44/109) in the HP-hMG group. Conclusion: HP-hMG is as effective as r-FSH in terms of oocyte and embryo quality and clinical pregnancy outcomes in patients undergoing ICSI with moderate male-factor infertility.

___

  • Siristatidis C, Trivella M, Chrelias C, Sioulas VD, Vrachnis N, Kassanos D. A short narrative review of the feasibility of adopting mild ovarian stimulation for IVF as the current standard of care. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2012; 286: 505–10.
  • Pouwer AW, Farquhar C, Kremer JA. Long-acting FSH versus daily FSH for women undergoing assisted reproduction. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2012; 6: CD009577.
  • Reindollar RH, Goldman MB. Gonadotropin therapy: a 20th century relic. Fertil Steril 2012; 97: 813–8.
  • Beall SA, DeCherney A. History and challenges surrounding ovarian stimulation in the treatment of infertility. Fertil Steril 2012; 97: 795–801.
  • Loumaye E, Engrand P, Shoham Z, Hillier SG, Baird DT. Clinical evidence of an LH ‘ceiling’ effect induced by administration of recombinant human LH during the late follicular phase of stimulation cycles in World Health Organization type I and type II anovulation. Hum Reprod 2003; 18: 314–22.
  • Bjercke S, Tanbo T, Abyholm T, Omland A, Opİien HK, Fedorcsak P. Clinical outcome following stimulation with highly purified hMG or recombinant FSH in patients undergoing their first treatment cycle of IVF or ICSI. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2010; 89: 1053–60.
  • Pacchiarotti A, Sbracia M, Frega A, Selman H, Rinaldi L, Pacchiarotti A. Urinary hMG (Meropur) versus recombinant FSH plus recombinant LH (Pergoveris) in IVF: a multicenter, prospective, randomized controlled trial. Fertil Steril 2010; 94: 2467–9.
  • Ye H, Huang G, Pei L, Zeng P, Luo X. Outcome of in vitro fertilization following stimulation with highly purified hMG or recombinant FSH in downregulated women of advanced reproductive age: a prospective, randomized and controlled trial. Gynecol Endocrinol 2012; 28: 540–44.
  • Kilani Z, Dakkak A, Ghunaim S, Cognigni GE, Tabarelli C, Parmegiani L et al. A prospective, randomized, controlled trial comparing HP-hMG with r- FSH in women undergoing ICSI: ovarian response and clinical outcomes. Hum Reprod 2003; 18: 1194–9.
  • European and Israeli Study Group on Highly Purified Menotropin versus r-FSH. Efficacy and safety of highly purified menotropin versus r-FSH in IVF, ICSI cycles: a randomized, comparative trial. Fertil Steril 2002; 78: 520–8.
  • Anderson AN, Devroey P, Arce JC. Clinical outcome following stimulation with HP-hMG or r-FSH in patient undergoing IVF: a randomized assessor blind controlled trial. Hum Reprod 2006; 21: 3217–27.
  • Ziebe S, Lundin K, Janssens R, Helmgaard L, Arce JC. Influence of ovarian stimulation with HP-hMG or recombinant FSH on embryo quality parameters in patients undergoing IVF. Hum Reprod 2007; 22: 2404–13.
  • Hompes PG, Broekmans FJ, Hoozemans DA, Schats R. Effectiveness of highly purified human menopausal gonadotropin vs. recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone in first-cycle in vitro fertilization-intracytoplasmic sperm injection patients. Fertil Steril 2008; 89: 1685–93.
  • Al-Inany H, Aboulghar M, Mansour R, Serour G. Meta-analysis of recombinant versus urinary-derived FSH: an update. Hum Reprod 2003; 18: 305–13.
  • Al-Inany H, Aboulghar MA, Mansour RT, Serour GI. Ovulation induction in the new millennium: recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone versus human menopausal gonadotropin. Gynecol Endocrinol 2005; 20: 161–9.
  • Van Wely M, Westergaard LG, Bossuyt PM, Van der Veen F. Human menopausal gonadotropin versus recombinant follicle stimulation hormone for ovarian stimulation in assisted reproductive cycles. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2003; 1: CD003973.
  • Al-Inany HG, Abou-Setta AM, Aboulghar MA, Mansour RT, Serour GI. Efficacy and safety of human menopausal gonadotropins versus recombinant FSH: a meta-analysis. RBM Online 2008; 16: 81–8.
  • World Health Organization. WHO Laboratory Manual for the Examination of Human Semen and Semen-Cervical Mucus Interaction. 5th ed. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2010.
  • Fleming R, Chung CC, Yates RW, Coutts JR. Purified urinary follicle stimulating hormone induces different hormone profiles compared with menotropins, dependent upon the route of administration and endogenous luteinizing hormone activity. Hum Reprod 1996; 11: 1854–8.
  • Couzinet B, Lestrat N, Brailly S, Forest M, Schaison G. Stimulation of ovarian follicular maturation with pure follicle stimulating hormone in women with gonadotropin deficiency. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1988; 66: 552–6.
  • Shoham Z, Balen A, Patel A, Jacobs HS. Results of ovarian induction using human menopausal gonadotropin or purified follicle-stimulating hormone in hypogonadotropic hypogonadism patients. Fertil Steril 1991; 56: 1048–53.
  • Shoham Z, Mannaerts B, Insler V, Coelingh-Bennink H. Induction of follicular growth using recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone in two volunteer women with hypogonadotropic hypogonadism. Fertil Steril 1993; 59: 738– 42.
  • The European Recombinant Human LH Study Group. Recombinant human luteinizing hormone (LH) to support recombinant human follicle stimulating hormone (FSH)- induced follicular development in LH- and FSH-deficient anovulatory women: a dose-finding study. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1998; 83: 1507–14.
  • Platteau P, Andersen AN, Balen A, Devroey P, Sorenson P, Helmgaard L et al. Similar ovulation rates, but different follicular development with highly purified menotropin compared with r-FSH in WHO group II anovulatory infertility: a randomized controlled study. Hum Reprod 2006; 21: 1798–804.
  • Lisi F, Rinaldi L, Fishel S, Caserta D, Lisi R, Campbell A. Evaluation of two doses of recombinant luteinizing hormone supplementation in an unselected group of women undergoing follicular stimulation for in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 2005; 83: 309–15.
  • Platteau P, Smitz J, Albano C, Sİrensen P, Arce JC, Devroey P. Exogenous luteinizing hormone activity may influence the treatment outcome in in vitro fertilization but not in intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles. Fertil Steril 2004; 81: 1401–4.
  • Assou S, Anahory T, Pantesco V, Le Carrour T, Pellestor F, Klein B et al. The human cumulus-oocyte complex gene-expression profile. Hum Reprod 2006; 21: 1705–19.
  • Westergaard LW, Bossuyt PM, Van der Veen F, van Wely M. WITHDRAWN: Human menopausal gonadotropin versus recombinant follicle stimulation hormone for ovarian stimulation in assisted reproductive cycles. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011; 16: CD003973.
Turkish Journal of Medical Sciences-Cover
  • ISSN: 1300-0144
  • Yayın Aralığı: Yılda 6 Sayı
  • Yayıncı: TÜBİTAK
Sayıdaki Diğer Makaleler

Pyrazinamide monoresistance in clinical isolates

Nuri ÖZKÜTÜK, Nezaket KALIR, Nuran ESEN, Ayşe Aydan ÖZKÜTÜK

The effects of valsartan treatment on visfatin levels and lipid profiles in newly diagnosed hypertensives

Kenan SAĞLAM, Ümit AYDOĞAN, Oktay SARI, İsmail ATACAN, Tuncer ÇAYCI, Adem PARLAK, Deniz Engin GÖK

Right ventricular function and its relation with TIMI frame count in the coronary slow flow phenomenon

Kemal KARAAĞAÇ, Adem BEKLER, Tezcan PEKER, Fatma Özlem ÖZLÜK ARICAN, Mustafa YILMAZ

Does apnea hypopnea index alone reflect obstructive sleep apnea severity?

Ömer ARAZ, Mehmet MERAL, Ali Metin GÖRGÜNER, Metin AKGÜN, Didem PULUR, Elif UÇAR YILMAZEL

MMP-2, TIMP-2, and MMP-2/TIMP-2 complex levels in epidermoid lung cancer

AKÖZ Mehmet, Burhan APİLİOĞULLARI, Murat ÖNCEL, Aysel KIYICI, Müfide ÖNCEL

Neurocognitive functioning in young high-risk offspring having a parent with bipolar I disorder

Erdem DEVECİ, Erol OZAN, İsmet KIRPINAR, Meltem ORAL, Ali Gökhan DALOĞLU, Nazan AYDIN, Ahmet ÖZTÜRK -

Mean platelet volume as a fibrosis marker in patients with chronic hepatitis C

Orhan Kürşat POYRAZOĞLU, Gökmen ZARARSIZ, Samet YALÇIN, Ahmet KARAMAN, Erdem Arzu TAŞDEMİR, Hatice KARAMAN, Tuba KAYMAN, Çiğdem KARAKÜKCÜ

The effects of an adaptive directional BEAM microphone on the mismatch negativity responses of cochlear implant users in noise

Ferda AKDAŞ, Asuman ERDOĞAN

Assessment of hearing ability with pure-tone audiometry and otoacoustic emission methods in patients undergoing spinal anesthesia

Mustafa SÜREN, Levent GÜRBÜZLER, Serkan KARAMAN, Ziya KAYA, Semih ARICI

Preliminary data from a surveillance study on surgical site infections and assessment of risk factors in a university hospital

Mustafa NAMIDURU, Rıza ÇAM, Ayşe Özlem METE, Vuslat BOŞNAK, İlkay KARAOĞLAN