Microdose follicular phase gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists (GnRH-a) compared with luteal phase GnRH-a for ovarian stimulation at in vitro fertilization55The views expressed in this article are those of the author(s) and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Navy, Department of Defense, nor the U.S. government.

1999 ◽  
Vol 72 (6) ◽  
pp. 1018-1023 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mark P Leondires ◽  
Mariabelle Escalpes ◽  
James H Segars ◽  
Richard T Scott ◽  
Bradley T Miller
Keyword(s):  
Department Of Defense ◽  
Ovarian Stimulation ◽  
Luteal Phase ◽  
Follicular Phase ◽  
Gonadotropin Releasing Hormone ◽  
Navy Department ◽  
Official Policy ◽  
Department Of The Navy ◽  
The U.S

Institutionalizing Modular Adaptable Ship Technologies

2012 ◽  
Author(s):  
Norbert H. Doerry
Keyword(s):  
Service Life ◽  
Department Of Defense ◽  
System Technology ◽  
Official Policy ◽  
Mission System ◽  
Department Of The Navy ◽  
The U.S

The U.S. Navy is tasked within a constrained budget with fulfilling its missions in an environment of evolving threats and a corresponding rapidly evolving mission system technology base. Modular Adaptable Ship (MAS) technologies enable the affordable transformation of a ship over its service life to maintain military relevance. The views expressed in this paper are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Navy, the Department of Defense, or the U.S. Government.

Luteal phase ovarian stimulation versus follicular phase ovarian stimulation results in different human cumulus cells gene expression: a pilot study

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Li-Te Lin ◽  
Ju-Yueh Li ◽  
Kuan-Hao Tsui ◽  
Chia-Jung Li ◽  
Peng-Hui Wang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Gene Expression ◽  
Mrna Expression ◽  
Ovarian Stimulation ◽  
Luteal Phase ◽  
Cumulus Cells ◽  
Follicular Phase ◽  
Basic Characteristics ◽  
The Impact ◽  
Luteal Phase Ovarian Stimulation

Abstract OBJECTIVE: Physiologic elevated levels of progesterone in luteal phase can impede early-onset LH surge. However, the impact of high levels of progesterone on the oocyte or cumulus cells (CCs) remains indistinct. Therefore, the aim of study was to investigate the CCs gene expression between luteal phase ovarian stimulation (LPOS) and follicular phase ovarian stimulation (FPOS) in poor ovarian responders (PORs) undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a prospective non-randomized trial (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03238833). A total of 36 PORs who conformed Bologna criteria and underwent IVF cycles were enrolled. 15 PORs were allocated to the LPOS group and 21 PORs were allocated to the FPOS group. Basic characteristics, cycle characteristics and pregnancy outcomes were compared between the two groups. Moreover, CCs genes regarding inflammation (CXCL1, CXCL3, TNF, PTGES), oxidative-phosphorylation (NDUFB7, NDUFA4L2, SLC25A27), apoptosis (DAPK3, BCL6B) and metabolism (PCK1, LDHC) were analyzed using real-time quantitative PCR between the two groups. RESULTS: Basic characteristics and IVF outcomes were similar between the two groups except significantly high progesterone level in the LPOS group. The mRNA expression of CXCL1 and PTGES were significantly lower in the LPOS group than in the FPOS group ( p < 0.05). The LPOS group had significantly lower mRNA expression of NDUFB7 and NDUFA4L2 than the FPOS group ( p < 0.05). DAPK3 and BCL6B mRNA expression were significantly higher in the LPOS group compared to FPOS group ( p < 0.05). Increased expression of PCK1 and decreased expression of LDHC were observed in the LPOS group compared to the FPOS group. ( p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Compared to the FPOS, the LPOS seemed to reduce favorable inflammation and mitochondrial function, and induce apoptosis and abnormal glucose metabolism in CCs.

scholarly journals Double or dual stimulation in poor ovarian responders: where do we stand?

2021 ◽  
Vol 15 ◽  
pp. 263349412110241
Author(s):  
Mehtap Polat ◽  
Sezcan Mumusoglu ◽  
Irem Yarali Ozbek ◽  
Gurkan Bozdag ◽  
Hakan Yarali
Keyword(s):  
Menstrual Cycle ◽  
In Vitro Fertilization ◽  
Live Birth ◽  
Ovarian Stimulation ◽  
Luteal Phase ◽  
Follicular Phase ◽  
Vitro Fertilization ◽  
Poor Ovarian Responders ◽  
Double Stimulation

Recent advances in our recognition of two to three follicular waves of development in a single menstrual cycle has challenged the dogmatic approach of ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization starting in the early follicular phase. First shown in veterinary medicine and thereafter in women, luteal phase stimulation–derived oocytes are at least as competent as those retrieved following follicular phase stimulation. Poor ovarian responders still remain a challenge for many decades simply because they do not respond to ovarian stimulation. Performing follicular phase stimulation and luteal phase stimulation in the same menstrual cycle, named as double stimulation/dual stimulation, clearly increases the number of oocytes, which is a robust surrogate marker of live birth rate in in vitro fertilization across all female ages. Of interest, apart from one study, the bulk of evidence reports significantly higher number of oocytes following luteal phase stimulation when compared with follicular phase stimulation; hence, performing double stimulation/dual stimulation doubles the number of oocytes leading to a marked decrease in patient drop-out rate which is one of the major factors limiting cumulative live birth rates in such poor prognosis patients. The limited data with double stimulation/dual stimulation-derived embryos is reassuring for obstetric and neonatal outcome. The mandatory requirement of freeze-all and lack of cost-effectiveness data are limitations of this novel approach. Double stimulation/dual stimulation is an effective strategy when the need to obtain oocytes is urgent, including patients with malignant diseases undergoing oocyte cryopreservation and patients of advanced maternal age or with reduced ovarian reserve.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document