Skip to main content
Log in

In Vitro Fertilization with Low-Dose Clomiphene Citrate Stimulation in Women Who Respond Poorly to Superovulation

  • Published:
Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose: Our experience with IVF using low-dose clomiphene citrate for stimulation in “non-” and “poor” responders was reviewed and the treatment outcomes with the previous controlled ovarian stimulation cycles in which hMG and GnRH agonist were used were compared.

Methods: The treatment outcome in 11 non- and 20 poor responders having 30 and 53 clomiphene citrate IVF treatment cycles, respectively, were compared with the treatment outcome in the previous long-protocol buserelin/hMG cycles.

Results: The clinical pregnancy rates per oocyte collection achieved in the first clomiphene citrate cycle in non (9.1%)- and poor (10%) responders were comparable to those achieved by poor responders (11.9%) who had buserelin/hMG using the long protocol. Although the numbers were small, a similar pregnancy rate could still be achieved in poor responders up to the third attempt using clomiphene citrate.

Conclusions: IVF using long-protocol buserelin/hMG is more successful than using clomiphene citrate stimulation. However, this advantage may not be significant in those women with a previous poor response to buserelin/hMG. It is suggested that for such poor responders, three attempts of IVF in a clomiphene citrate cycle may offer a viable therapeutic alternative before reverting to more stressful, expensive, and time-consuming treatment.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

REFERENCES

  1. Jenkins JM, Davies DW, Devonport H, Anthony FW, Gadd SC, Watson RH, Masson GM: Comparison of “poor” responders with “good” responders using standard buserelin/human menopausal gonadotropin regime for in vitro fertilization. Hum Reprod 1991;6:918–921

    Google Scholar 

  2. McKenna KM, Foster P, McBain J, Martin M, Johnston WI: Combined treatment with gonadotrophin releasing hormone agonist and gonadotrophins in poor responders hyperstimulation for in vitro fertilization (IVF): Clinical and endocrine results. Aust NZ J Obstet Gynecol 1989;29:428–432

    Google Scholar 

  3. Karande VC, Rinehatt J, Miller EC, Pratt DE, Morris R, Levrant S, Rao R, Balin M, Bricksin M, Gleicher N: The value of stimulating poor responders using “flare” protocol in cycles with low basal FSH concentrations during IVF. 12th Annual Meeting of the EHSRE, Maastricht, Belgium. Hum Reprod 1996;11:200 (abstract T031)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Dor J, Seidman DS, Amudai E, Bider D, Levran D, Mashiach S: Adjuvant growth hormone therapy in poor responders to in-vitro fertilisation: A prospective randomised placebo-controlled double blind study. Hum Reprod 1995;10:40–43

    Google Scholar 

  5. Steinkampf MP, Kretzer PA, McElroy E, Conway-Myers BA: A simplified approach to in vitro fertilisation. J Reprod Med 1992;37:199–204

    Google Scholar 

  6. Hoult IJ, de Crespigny LC, O'Herlithy C, Speirs AL, Lopata A, Kellow G, Johnstone I, Robinson HP: Ultrasound control of clomiphene/human chorionic gonadotrophin stimulated cycles for oocyte recovery and in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 1981;36:316–319

    Google Scholar 

  7. Lindheim SR, Vidali A, Ditkoff E, Sauer MV: Poor responders to ovarian hyperstimulation may benefit from an attempt at natural-cycle oocyte retrieval. J Reprod Med 1997;14:174–176

    Google Scholar 

  8. Sathanandan M, Warnes GM, Kirby CA, Petrucco OM, Matthews CD: Adjuvant leuprolide in normal, abnormal, and poor responders to controlled ovarian hyperstimulation for in vitro fertilisation/gamete intrafallopian transfer. Fertil Steril 1989;6:998–1006

    Google Scholar 

  9. Rysselberge MV, Puissant F, Barlow P, Lejeune B, Delvigne A, Leroy F: Fertility prognosis in IVF treatment of patients with cancelled cycles. Hum Reprod 1989;4:663–666

    Google Scholar 

  10. van-Hooff MH, Alberda AT, Hursman GJ, Zeilmaker GH, Leerentveld RA: Doubling the human menopausal gonadotropin dose in the course of an IVF treatment cycle in low-responders: A randomized study. Hum Reprod 1993;8:369–373

    Google Scholar 

  11. Dor J, Seidman DS, Ben-Shlomo I, Levran D, Karasik A, Mashiach S: The prognostic importance of the number of oocytes retrieved and estradiol levels in poor and normal responders in in vitro fertilisation (IVF) treatment. J Assist Reprod Genet 1992;9:228–232

    Google Scholar 

  12. Tasdernir M, Tasdernir I, Kodama H, Fukuda J, Tanaka T: Short protocol of gonadotropin releasing hormone agonist administration gave better results in long protocol poor-responders in IVF-ET. J Obstet Gynaecol Res 1996;1:73–77

    Google Scholar 

  13. Serafini P, Stone B, Kerin J, Batzofin J, Quinn P, Marrs RP: An alternative approach to controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in “poor” responders: pre-treatment with gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogue. Fertil Steril 1988;49:90–95

    Google Scholar 

  14. Ben-Rafael Z, Feldberg D: The poor-responder patient in an in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer program. J Assist Reprod Genet 1993;2:118–120

    Google Scholar 

  15. Ibrahim ZHZ, Marson PL, Buck P, Lieberman BA: The use of biosynthetic growth hormone to augment ovulation induction with buserelin acetate/human menopausal gonadotrophin during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation for in vitro fertilization in women with a poor ovarian response. Fertil Steril 1991;55:202–204

    Google Scholar 

  16. Cohen J, Alikani M, Trowbridge J, Rosenwaks Z: Implantation enhancement by selective assisted hatching using zona drilling of human embryos with poor prognosis. Hum Reprod 1992;7:685–691

    Google Scholar 

  17. Schoolcraft WB, Schlenker T, Gee M, Jones GS, Jones HW: Assisted hatching in the treatment of poor prognosis in vitro fertilisation candidates. Fertil Steril 1994;62:551–554

    Google Scholar 

  18. Navot D, Bergh PA, Williams MA, Garrisi GJ, Guzman I, Sandler B, Grunfeld L: Poor oocyte quality rather than implantation failure as a cause of age-related decline in female fertility. Lancet 1991;337:1375–1377

    Google Scholar 

  19. Paulson RJ, Sauer MV, Francis MM, Macaso TM, Lobo RA: In vitro fertilisation in unstimulated cycles: The University of Southern California experience. Fertil Steril 1992;57:290–293

    Google Scholar 

  20. Seibel MM, Kearnan M, Kiessling A: Parameters that predict success for natural cycle in vitro fertilisation-embryo transfer. Fertil Steril 1995;63:1251–1254

    Google Scholar 

  21. Daya S, Gunby J, Hughes EG, Collins JA, Sagle MA, YoungLai EV: Natural cycles in-vitro fertilisation: Cost-effectiveness analysis and factors influencing outcome. Hum Reprod 1995;10:1719–1724

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Awonuga, A.O., Nabi, A. In Vitro Fertilization with Low-Dose Clomiphene Citrate Stimulation in Women Who Respond Poorly to Superovulation. J Assist Reprod Genet 14, 503–507 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021171225322

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1021171225322

Navigation