论文部分内容阅读
目的 比较GnRH -a制剂Triptorelin和Buserelin的体外受精—胚胎移植治疗效果。方法 185例不孕妇女随机分成两组 ,A组 :85例 ,黄体期应用Triptorelin(月经第 2 1d皮下一次性注射 1.2 5～ 1.6 0mg) ;B组 :10 0例 ,黄体期应用Buserelin。两组均用长方案降调节。比较两组的高纯度促卵泡刺激素用药剂量、取卵数、受精率、卵裂率和妊娠率。结果 两组的取卵数、受精率、卵裂率和妊娠率无显著性差异 (P >0 .0 5 )。A组平均每周期用高纯度卵泡刺激素 4 0 .3± 18.2支 ,B组平均每周期用 30 .2± 12 .3支 ,有显著性差异 (P <0 .0 1)。结论 Triptorelin和Buserelin的长方案均可获得高质量的成熟卵子 ,对不孕妇女的体外受精—胚胎移植治疗效果相似。Triptorelin的降调节作用较Buserelin的强。黄体期一次性皮下注射Triptorelin1.2 5～ 1.6 0mg可简化治疗过程 ,患者易于接受。
Objective To compare the in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer of GnRH-a preparations with Triptorelin and Buserelin. Methods One hundred and seventy five infertile women were randomly divided into two groups: group A (n = 85), administration of Triptorelin in the luteal phase (n = 125) and group B (n = 10). Buserelin was used in the luteal phase. Long-term regimen was used for both groups. The dosage of high-purity follicle-stimulating hormone, number of oocytes retrieved, fertilization rate, cleavage rate and pregnancy rate were compared between the two groups. Results There were no significant differences in number of oocytes, fertilization rate, cleavage rate and pregnancy rate between the two groups (P> 0.05). In group A, the average daily use of high purity follicle stimulating hormone was 60.3 ± 18.2 branches, and the average number of cycles in group B was 30.2 ± 12.3. There was a significant difference (P <0.01). Conclusions Both Triptorelin and Buserelin have long-term strategies for obtaining high-quality mature eggs and are similar for infertile women undergoing in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer. Triptorelin’s down-regulation effect is stronger than that of Buserelin. Luteal phase of a subcutaneous injection of Triptorelin1.5 5 ~ 1.6 0mg can simplify the treatment process, the patient is easy to accept.