Volume 11, Issue 3 (5-2013)                   IJRM 2013, 11(3): 243-0 | Back to browse issues page

XML Persian Abstract Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Azargoon A, Bahrami M, Alavy Toussy J. Comparing clomiphen citrate plus HMG with clomiphen citrate plus rFSH in IUI cycles in couples with unexplained ormale factor infertility: A prospective randomized study. IJRM. 2013; 11 (3) :243-0
URL: http://journals.ssu.ac.ir/ijrmnew/article-1-396-en.html
1- Department of Infertility, Amir-AL-Momenin Hospital, Semnan University of Medical Sciences, Semnan, Iran , azarmona2003@yahoo.com
2- Department of Infertility, Amir-AL-Momenin Hospital, Semnan University of Medical Sciences, Semnan, Iran
Abstract:   (1054 Views)
Background: Different protocols are used for controlled ovarian hyper stimulation (COH), but the optimal method has not yet been determined.
Objective: The aim of this study was to compare the outcome of controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) using clomiphen citrate (CC) plus HMG versus CC plus rFSH in intra uterine insemination cycles (IUI).
Materials and Methods: 144 women with unexplained or male factor infertility undergoing IUI cycles were randomized (72 patients in CC plus rFSH group and 72 patients in CC plus HMG group) and included in this single blind study from October 2006 to June 2010. The primary outcomes were clinical and ongoing pregnancy rates. The number of dominant follicles, mean of follicular size, endometrial thickness on the day of HCG administration, total dose of gonadotropins and duration of stimulation with gonadotropins were secondary outcomes.
Results: Clinical and ongoing pregnancy rates were not significantly different in the two groups .There was a significant higher multiple pregnancy rate in CC plus rFSH group (33.3%) versus CC plus HMG group (12.5%; p<0.005). There were no statistically significant differences in the secondary outcomes between the two groups.
Conclusion: According to our results it seems that CC plus HMG is a more suitable and cost-effective regimen than CC plus rFSH in IUI cycles in patients with unexplained or male factor infertility.
Full-Text [PDF 313 kb]   (174 Downloads) |   |   Full-Text (HTML)  (243 Views)  
Type of Study: Original Article |

References
1. Zayed F, Lenton EA, Cook ID .Comparison between stimulated in vitro fertilization and stimulated intrauterine insemination for the treatment of unexplained and mild male factor infertility. Hum Reprod 1997; 12: 2408-2413. [DOI:10.1093/humrep/12.11.2408]
2. Zikopoulos K, West CP, Thong PW, Kacser EM, Morrison J, Wu FC. Homologous intra-uterine insemination has no advantage over timed natural intercourse when used in combination with ovulation induction for the treatment of unexplained infertility. Hum Reprod 1993; 8: 563-567. [DOI:10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a138096]
3. Hughes EG. The effectiveness of ovulation induction and intrauterine insemination in the treatment of persistent infertility: a meta-analysis. Hum Reprod 1997; 12: 1865-1672. [DOI:10.1093/humrep/12.9.1865]
4. Cohlen BJ, Velde ER, Van kooji RJ, Looman CW, Habbema JD. Controlled ovarian hyperstimulation and intrauterine insemination for treating male subfertility:a controlled study. Hum Reprod 1998; 13: 1553-1558. [DOI:10.1093/humrep/13.6.1553]
5. Zeyneloglu HB, Arici A, Olive DL, Duleba AJ. Comparison of intrauterine insemination with timed intercourse in superovulated cycles with gonadotropins:a meta-analysis. Fertil Steril 1998; 69: 486-491. [DOI:10.1016/S0015-0282(97)00552-9]
6. Guzick DS, Carson SA, Coutifaris C, Overstreet JW, Factor-Litvac P, Steinkampf MP, et al. Efficacy of superovulation and intrauterine insemination in the treatment of infertility. New Engel J Med 1999; 340: 177-183. [DOI:10.1056/NEJM199901213400302]
7. Allen NC, Herbert CM, Maxon WS, Rogers BJ, Diamonds MP, Wentz AC. Intrauterine insemination:a critical review. Fertil Steril 1985; 44: 569-580. [DOI:10.1016/S0015-0282(16)48969-7]
8. Guzick DS, Sullivan MW, Adamson GD, Cedars MI, Falk RJ, Peterson EP, et al. Efficacy of treatment for unexplained infertility. Fertil Steril 1998; 70: 207-213. [DOI:10.1016/S0015-0282(98)00177-0]
9. Iberico G, Vioque J, Ariza N, Lozano JM, Roca M, Liacer J, et al. Analysis of factors influencing pregnancy rate in homologous intrauterine insemination. Fertil Steril 2004; 81: 1308-1313. [DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2003.09.062]
10. Gerli S, Casini ML, Unfer V, Costabile L, Bini V, Di Renzo GC. Recombinant versus urinary follicle stimulating hormone in intrauterine insemination: a prospective, randomized analysis of cost effectiveness. Fertil Steril 2004; 83: 573-578. [DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2004.04.026]
11. Demirol A, Gurgan T. Comparison of different gonadotrophin preparations in intra insemination cycles for the treatment of unexplained infertility. Hum Reprod 2007; 22: 97-100. [DOI:10.1093/humrep/del335]
12. Filicori M, Cognigi G, Procognoli P, Tabarelli C, Ferlini F, Perri T, et al. Comparison of controlled ovarian stimulation with human menopausal gonadotropin or recombinant follicle stimulating hormone. Fertil Steril 2003; 80: 390-397. [DOI:10.1016/S0015-0282(03)00594-6]
13. O'Leary AJ, Griffiths AN, Evans J, Pugh ND. Perifollicular blood flow and pregnancy in superovulated intrauterine insemination (IUI) cycles: An observational comparison of recombinant follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) and urinary gonadotropins. Fertil Steril 2009; 92: 1366-1368. [DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.02.046]
14. Stone BA, Vargyas JM, Ringler GE, Stein AL, Marrs RP. Determinants of outcome of intrauterine insemination: analysis of outcome of 9963 consecutive cycles. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1999; 180: 1522-1534. [DOI:10.1016/S0002-9378(99)70048-7]
15. Kaplan PF, Austin DJ, Freund R. Subcutaneus human menopausal gonadotropin administration for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation with intrauterine insemination cycles. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2000; 182: 1421-1426. [DOI:10.1067/mob.2000.106131]
16. Alborzi S, Motazedian S, Parsanezhad ME, Jannati S. Comparison of the effectiveness of single intrauterine insemination versus double intrauterine insemination per cycle in infertile patients. Fertil Steril 2003; 80: 595-599. [DOI:10.1016/S0015-0282(03)00980-4]
17. Sagnella F, Moro F, Lanzone A, Tropea A, Martinez D, Capalbo A, et al. A prospective randomized noninferiority studycomparing recombinant FSH and highly purified menotropin in intrauterine insemination cycles incouples with unexplained infertility and/ormild-moderate male factor. Fertil Steril 2 011; 95: 689-694.
18. Mahani I, Afnan M. The pregnancy rates with intrauterine insemination in super ovulated cycles employing different protocols (Clomiphen Citrate"CC", Human Menopausal Gonadotropin "HMG" and HMG+CC) and in natural ovulatory cycle. JPMA 2004; 54: 503.
19. Rashidi B, Gharaie m, Momeni M, Tehraninejad E. A comparison of clomiphen citrate and sequential clomiphen citrate plus human menopausal gonadotropin for use in conjunction with intra uterine insemination. Acta Medica Iranica 2005; 43: 187-197.
20. Sikandar R, Virk S, Lakhani SH, Shahab H, Rizvi J. Intrauterine insemination with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in the treatment of subfertility. JCPSP 2005; 5: 782-785.
21. Platteu P, Andersen A, Nyboe A, Devroe P, SorensenP, Helmgaard L. Similar ovulation rate, but different follicular development with highly purified menotrophin with recombinant FSH in WHO group II anovulatory infertility. Hum Reprod 2006; 21: 1798-1804. [DOI:10.1093/humrep/del085]
22. Callahan TL, Hall JE, Ettner SL, Christiansen CL, Green MF, Crowly WF Jr. The economic impact of multiple-gestation pregnancies and the contribution of assisted-reproduction techniques to their incidence. N Engl J Med 1994; 331: 244-249. [DOI:10.1056/NEJM199407283310407]
23. The ESHRE Capri Workshop Group. Multiple gestationpregnancy. Hum Reprod 2000; 15: 1856-1864.

Send email to the article author


© 2021 All Rights Reserved | International Journal of Reproductive BioMedicine

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb