论文部分内容阅读
目的:探讨分析非排卵障碍不孕患者接受自然周期与促排卵周期宫腔内夫精人工授精的妊娠结局。方法:回顾性队列研究分析2014年1月至2019年10月期间就诊于杭州市妇产科医院，年龄≤35岁，因非排卵障碍不孕就诊的患者共821个周期，按照是否促排卵分为自然周期组（N组），共225个周期；促排卵周期组（O组），共596个周期；按照宫腔内夫精人工授精不孕的原因［不明原因不孕（A），男方精液异常（B），性功能障碍（C），单侧输卵管梗阻（D）］分为4个亚组，分别为NA组（67例）、NB组（94例）、NC组（39例）、ND组（25例）和OA组（233例）、OB组（217例）、OC组（51例）、OD组（95例）。比较N组患者和O组患者一般资料、临床妊娠率、流产率、异位妊娠率、多胎妊娠率等指标；比较各亚组之间临床妊娠率、流产率、异位妊娠率、多胎妊娠率。结果:①N组和O组患者临床妊娠率、流产率、异位妊娠率之间比较，差异均无统计学意义（n P均n >0.05），但是O组多胎妊娠率为13.1%（13/99），明显高于N组的0%（0/30），差异有统计学意义（n P=0.038)。②NA组、NB组、NC组、ND组和OA组、OB组、OC组、OD组之间临床妊娠率、流产率、异位妊娠率、多胎妊娠率比较差异均无统计学意义（n P均n >0.05）。n 结论:对于非排卵障碍不孕患者进行宫腔内夫精人工授精助孕治疗时，促排卵周期并不能提高患者的临床妊娠率，反而会增加多胎妊娠率。“,”Objective:To explore the pregnancy outcomes of non-ovulation disorder infertile patients with natural cycle or ovulation-promoting cycle of intrauterine insemination (IUI) with the husband's sperm.Methods:A retrospective cohort study was carried out on a total of 821 cycles of non-ovulation disorder infertile patients who received IUI with ≤35 years old at the Hangzhou Women's Hospital from January 2014 to October 2019. According to whether the ovulation induction, they were divided into natural cycle group (group N, n n=225) and ovulation induction cycle group (group O, n n=596). Meanwhile, according to the etiology of IUI infertility [unexplained infertility (A), men's semen abnormalities (B), sexual dysfunction (C), unilateral tubal obstruction (D)], they were divided into four subgroups, namely NA group (n n=67), NB group (n n=94), NC group (n n=39), ND group (n n=25) and OA group (n n=233), OB group (n n=217), OC group (n n=51), OD group (n n=95). The general information, clinical pregnancy rate, abortion rate, ectopic pregnancy rate, multiple pregnancy rate, and other indicators of patients were compared between group N and group O. Clinical pregnancy rate, abortion rate, ectopic pregnancy rate, and multiple pregnancy rate were compared between each two subgroups.n Results:1) The multiple pregnancy rate of ovulation induction cycle group was 13.1% (13/99), more than 0% (0/30) of natural cycle group, the differences was statistically significant (n P=0.038). There were no significant differences between the two groups in clinical pregnancy rate, abortion rate, and ectopic pregnancy rate (all n P>0.05). 2) There were no significant differences between each two subgroups in clinical pregnancy rate, abortion rate, ectopic pregnancy rate and multiple birth rate (all n P>0.05).n Conclusion:For non-ovulatory infertile patients with IUI, the ovulation induction may not increase the clinical pregnancy rate of the patient, but may increase the multiple birth rate.