Table of Contents Author Guidelines Submit a Manuscript
Corrigendum

A corrigendum for this article has been published. To view the corrigendum, please click here.

BioMed Research International
Volume 2017, Article ID 5637923, 8 pages
https://doi.org/10.1155/2017/5637923
Research Article

A Higher Ovarian Response after Stimulation for IVF Is Related to a Higher Number of Euploid Embryos

1Human Reproduction Unit, Instituto Valenciano de Infertilidad (IVI), Plaza de la Policía Local 3, 46015 Valencia, Spain
2PGD Laboratory, Instituto Valenciano de Infertilidad (IVI), Plaza de la Policía Local 3, 46015 Valencia, Spain

Correspondence should be addressed to Elena Labarta; se.ivi@atrabal.anele

Received 13 November 2016; Accepted 23 February 2017; Published 27 March 2017

Academic Editor: Mittal Suneeta

Copyright © 2017 Elena Labarta et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Linked References

  1. M. C. Chang, “Digynic triploidy after superovulation,” Nature, vol. 266, no. 5600, pp. 382–383, 1977. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  2. G. Ertzeid and R. Storeng, “The impact of ovarian stimulation on implantation and fetal development in mice,” Human Reproduction, vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 221–225, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  3. S. Ziebe, S. Bangsbøll, K. L. T. Schmidt, A. Loft, A. Lindhard, and A. N. Andersen, “Embryo quality in natural versus stimulated IVF cycles,” Human Reproduction, vol. 19, no. 6, pp. 1457–1460, 2004. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  4. L. Gras, J. Mcbain, A. Trounson, and I. Kola, “The incidence of chromosomal aneuploidy in stimulated and unstimulated (natural) uninseminated human oocytes,” Human Reproduction, vol. 7, no. 10, pp. 1396–1401, 1992. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  5. E. Labarta, E. Bosch, P. Alamá, C. Rubio, L. Rodrigo, and A. Pellicer, “Moderate ovarian stimulation does not increase the incidence of human embryo chromosomal abnormalities in in vitro fertilization cycles,” Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, vol. 97, no. 10, pp. E1987–E1994, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  6. J.-Z. Qin, L.-H. Pang, M.-Q. Li, J. Xu, and X. Zhou, “Risk of chromosomal abnormalities in early spontaneous abortion after assisted reproductive technology: a meta-analysis,” PLoS ONE, vol. 8, no. 10, Article ID e75953, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  7. D. A. Conway, S. S. Patel, J. Liem et al., “The risk of cytogenetic abnormalities in the late first trimester of pregnancies conceived through assisted reproduction,” Fertility and Sterility, vol. 95, no. 2, pp. 503–506, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  8. J. J. Tarin and A. Pellicer, “Consequences of high ovarian response to gonadotropins: a cytogenetic analysis of unfertilized human oocytes,” Fertility and Sterility, vol. 54, no. 4, pp. 665–670, 1990. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  9. L. Gianaroli, M. C. Magli, G. Cavallini et al., “Predicting aneuploidy in human oocytes: key factors which affect the meiotic process,” Human Reproduction, vol. 25, no. 9, pp. 2374–2386, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  10. T. Haaf, A. Hahn, A. Lambrecht et al., “A high oocyte yield for intracytoplasmic sperm injection treatment is associated with an increased chromosome error rate,” Fertility and Sterility, vol. 91, no. 3, pp. 733–738, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  11. E. B. Baart, E. Martini, M. J. Eijkemans et al., “Milder ovarian stimulation for in-vitro fertilization reduces aneuploidy in the human preimplantation embryo: a randomized controlled trial,” Human Reproduction, vol. 22, no. 4, pp. 980–988, 2007. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  12. J.-C. Arce, A. Nyboe Andersen, M. Fernández-Sánchez et al., “Ovarian response to recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone: a randomized, antimüllerian hormone-stratified, dose-response trial in women undergoing in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection,” Fertility and Sterility, vol. 102, no. 6, pp. 1633–1640, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  13. B. Ata, B. Kaplan, H. Danzer et al., “Array CGH analysis shows that aneuploidy is not related to the number of embryos generated,” Reproductive BioMedicine Online, vol. 24, no. 6, pp. 614–620, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  14. S. Morin, K. Melzer-Ross, D. McCulloh, J. Grifo, and S. Munné, “A greater number of euploid blastocysts in a given cohort predicts excellent outcomes in single embryo transfer cycles,” Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics, vol. 31, no. 6, pp. 667–673, 2014. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  15. N. Gleicher, A. Kim, A. Weghofer, and D. H. Barad, “Lessons from elective in vitro fertilization (IVF) in, principally, non-infertile women,” Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology, vol. 10, article 48, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  16. M. Huber, N. Hadziosmanovic, L. Berglund, and J. Holte, “Using the ovarian sensitivity index to define poor, normal, and high response after controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in the long gonadotropin-releasing hormone-agonist protocol: suggestions for a new principle to solve an old problem,” Fertility and Sterility, vol. 100, no. 5, pp. 1270–1276.e3, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  17. A. Mercader, J. A. Garcia-Velasco, E. Escudero, J. Remohí, A. Pellicer, and C. Simón, “Clinical experience and perinatal outcome of blastocyst transfer after coculture of human embryos with human endometrial epithelial cells: a 5-year follow-up study,” Fertility and Sterility, vol. 80, no. 5, pp. 1162–1168, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  18. P. Mir, L. Rodrigo, E. Mateu et al., “Improving FISH diagnosis for preimplantation genetic aneuploidy screening,” Human Reproduction, vol. 25, no. 7, pp. 1812–1817, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  19. S. K. Sunkara, V. Rittenberg, N. Raine-Fenning, S. Bhattacharya, J. Zamora, and A. Coomarasamy, “Association between the number of eggs and live birth in IVF treatment: an analysis of 400 135 treatment cycles,” Human Reproduction, vol. 26, no. 7, pp. 1768–1774, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  20. D. Valbuena, J. Martin, J. L. De Pablo, J. Remohí, A. Pellicer, and C. Simón, “Increasing levels of estradiol are deleterious to embryonic implantation because they directly affect the embryo,” Fertility and Sterility, vol. 76, no. 5, pp. 962–968, 2001. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  21. E. Labarta, J. A. Martínez-Conejero, P. Alamá et al., “Endometrial receptivity is affected in women with high circulating progesterone levels at the end of the follicular phase: a functional genomics analysis,” Human Reproduction, vol. 26, no. 7, pp. 1813–1825, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  22. B. C. J. M. Fauser, G. Nargund, A. N. Andersen et al., “Mild ovarian stimulation for IVF: 10 years later,” Human Reproduction, vol. 25, no. 11, pp. 2678–2684, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  23. F. P. Hohmann, N. S. Macklon, and B. C. J. M. Fauser, “A randomized comparison of two ovarian stimulation protocols with gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist cotreatment for in vitro fertilization commencing recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone on cycle day 2 or 5 with the standard long GnRH agonist protocol,” Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism, vol. 88, no. 1, pp. 166–173, 2003. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  24. H. M. Fatemi, K. Doody, G. Griesinger, H. Witjes, and B. Mannaerts, “High ovarian response does not jeopardize ongoing pregnancy rates and increases cumulative pregnancy rates in a GnRH-antagonist protocol,” Human Reproduction, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 442–452, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  25. J. Ji, Y. Liu, X. H. Tong, L. Luo, J. Ma, and Z. Chen, “The optimum number of oocytes in IVF treatment: an analysis of 2455 cycles in China,” Human Reproduction, vol. 28, no. 10, pp. 2728–2734, 2013. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  26. A. Revelli, S. Casano, F. Salvagno, and L. Delle Piane, “Milder is better? advantages and disadvantages of ‘mild’ ovarian stimulation for human in vitro fertilization,” Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology, vol. 9, article 25, 2011. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  27. J. D. Kok, C. W. N. Looman, S. M. Weima, and E. R. Te Velde, “A high number of oocytes obtained after ovarian hyperstimulation for in vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection is not associated with decreased pregnancy outcome,” Fertility and Sterility, vol. 85, no. 4, pp. 918–924, 2006. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  28. E. Fragouli, A. Escalona, C. Gutiérrez-Mateo et al., “Comparative genomic hybridization of oocytes and first polar bodies from young donors,” Reproductive BioMedicine Online, vol. 19, no. 2, pp. 228–237, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  29. C. Rubio, A. Mercader, P. Alamá et al., “Prospective cohort study in high responder oocyte donors using two hormonal stimulation protocols: impact on embryo aneuploidy and development,” Human Reproduction, vol. 25, no. 9, pp. 2290–2297, 2010. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  30. M. F. G. Verberg, M. J. C. Eijkemans, N. S. Macklon et al., “The clinical significance of the retrieval of a low number of oocytes following mild ovarian stimulation for IVF: a meta-analysis,” Human Reproduction Update, vol. 15, no. 1, pp. 5–12, 2009. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  31. D. Stoop, B. Ermini, N. P. Polyzos et al., “Reproductive potential of a metaphase II oocyte retrieved after ovarian stimulation: an analysis of 23 354 ICSI cycles,” Human Reproduction, vol. 27, no. 7, pp. 2030–2035, 2012. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus
  32. P. Mir, E. Mateu, A. Mercader et al., “Confirmation rates of array-CGH in day-3 embryo and blastocyst biopsies for preimplantation genetic screening,” Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics, vol. 33, no. 1, pp. 59–66, 2016. View at Publisher · View at Google Scholar · View at Scopus