论文部分内容阅读
目的:系统地对比在高龄不孕女性中应用长疗程、拮抗剂与微刺激3种不同的促排卵方案的实际价值。方法:选取2013年5月至2014年4月东莞康华医院收治的150例高龄不孕女性进行分组对照研究,所有患者的年龄均大于或等于40岁,结合临床随机表法将其平均地列入甲、乙、丙3组,分别使用长方案、拮抗剂方案与微刺激方案,对比三组患者的治疗效果。结果:与乙组比较,甲组的平均促性腺激素(Gn)量、平均Gn时间和平均每胚Gn量显著较高,而与丙组比较,乙组的上述指标显著较高,差异均具有统计学意义(P<0.05);与甲组和乙组比较,丙组的平均每卵Gn量为最低,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05),与乙组比较,甲组的这一指标略低,但差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);与乙组比较,丙组的平均每卵可移植胚胎率略高,但差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),与乙组和丙组比较,甲组的这一指标明显较低,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05);与甲组和乙组比较,丙组的周期取消率显著较高,差异具有统计学意义(P<0.05),与甲组比较,乙组的这一指标略高,但是差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);三组患者的临床妊娠率比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论:在临床治疗高龄不孕女性时,微刺激方案有着高周期取消率的特点,长方案促排卵费力、费时,与此同时,拮抗剂方案的周期取消率较低,属于最佳的促排卵方案。
OBJECTIVE: To systematically compare the actual value of three different ovulation promotion programs in elderly infertile women with long course of treatment, antagonist and micro-stimulation. Methods: A total of 150 elderly infertile women who were admitted to Dongguan Kang Wah Hospital from May 2013 to April 2014 were enrolled in this study. All patients were over 40 years old. The average age of all patients was 40 years old. Into A, B, C three groups, respectively, the long program, the antagonist program and micro-stimulation program, compared the treatment effect of three groups of patients. Results: Compared with group B, the average gonadotropin (Gn) level, average Gn time and average Gn per embryo in group A were significantly higher than those in group B, and the above indexes in group B were significantly higher than those in group B (P <0.05). Compared with group A and group B, the average amount of Gn per egg in group C was the lowest, with significant difference (P <0.05). Compared with group B, group A (P> 0.05). Compared with group B, the average rate of transplanting embryos in group C was slightly higher, but the difference was not statistically significant (P> 0.05). Compared with group B and group C Compared with group A and group B, group C had a significantly higher rate of cancellation (P <0.05), but the difference was statistically significant (P < 0.05). Compared with group A, this index in group B was slightly higher, but the difference was not statistically significant (P> 0.05). There was no significant difference in clinical pregnancy rates between the three groups (P> 0.05). Conclusion: In the clinical treatment of elderly infertile women, the micro-stimulation program has a high rate of cancellation of the cycle characteristics of long-term ovulation induction cumbersome and time-consuming, at the same time, the cycle of antagonist program cancellation rate is low, is the best ovulation Program.