< Back to previous page


Cumulative live birth rate after ovarian stimulation with freeze-all in women with polycystic ovaries

Journal Contribution - Journal Article

Subtitle:does the polycystic ovary syndrome phenotype have an impact?

RESEARCH QUESTION: Do cumulative live birth rates (CLBR) differ between polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) phenotypes when a freeze-all strategy is used to prevent OHSS after ovarian stimulation?

DESIGN: A single-centre, retrospective cohort study of 422 women with PCOS or polycystic ovarian morphology (PCOM), in whom a freeze-all strategy was applied after GnRH agonist triggering because of hyper-response in their first or second IVF/ICSI. Primary outcome was CLBR; multivariate logistic regression analysis was used.

RESULTS: Phenotype A (hyperandrogenism + ovulation disorder + PCOM [HOP]) (n = 91/422 [21.6%]); phenotype C (hyperandrogenism + PCOM [HP]) (33/422 [7.8%]; phenotype D (ovulation disorder + PCOM [OP]) (n = 161/422 [38.2%]); and PCOM (n = 137/422 [32.5%]. Unadjusted CLBR was similar among the groups (69.2%, 69.7%, 79.5% and 67.9%, respectively; P = 0.11). According to multivariate logistic regression analysis, the phenotype did not affect CLBR (OR 0.72, CI 0.24 to 2.14 [phenotype C]; OR 1.55, CI 0.71 to 3.36 [phenotype D]; OR 0.84, CI 0.39 to 1.83 [PCOM]; P = 0.2, with phenotype A as reference).

CONCLUSIONS: In women with PCOS, hyper-response after ovarian stimulation confers CLBR of around 70%, irrespective of phenotype, when a freeze-all strategy is used. This contrasts with unfavourable clinical outcomes in women with hyperandrogenism and women with PCOS who underwent mild ovarian stimulation targeting normal ovarian response and fresh embryo transfer. The results should be interpreted with caution because the study is retrospective and cannot be generalized to all cycles as they pertain to those in which hyper-response is observed.

Journal: Reproductive Biomedicine Online
ISSN: 1472-6483
Issue: 3
Volume: 44
Pages: 565-571
Number of pages: 7
Publication year:2022
  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2021.11.009
  • ORCID: /0000-0003-3175-2996/work/110052350
  • ORCID: /0000-0002-9262-785X/work/110051924
  • ORCID: /0000-0002-3391-2669/work/110051880
  • ORCID: /0000-0001-5019-5924/work/110050845
  • ORCID: /0000-0001-7012-0436/work/110050465
  • Scopus Id: 85122917457