Reproduktionsmedizin. Ovarielle Stimulation – was gibt es Neues?

Unter Beibehaltung des klassischen Therapiekonzepts der Gonadotropinstimulation ermöglicht die Einführung langwirksamer FSH-Präparate und der sogenannten FSH-Biosimilars in den vergangenen Jahren patientenbezogene Modifikationen bei der ovariellen Stimulation vor einer IVF/ICSI-Therapie. Zusätzlich trägt eine verbesserte Vorhersage des ovariellen Ansprechens zu dem Trend einer zunehmenden Individualisierung der Stimulation mit dem Ziel einer geringeren Patientenbelastung durch die Vermeidung ovarieller Überstimulationssyndrome bei gleichzeitig höherer Effektivität bei.

• Literatur

• 1 Lunenfeld B. Historical perspectives in gonadotrophin therapy. Hum Reprod Update 2004; 10: 453-467
• 2 Blumenauer V, Czeromin U, Fiedler K et al. DIR Annual 2013 – German IVF Registry. J Reproduktionsmed Endokrinol 2014; 11: 236-273
• 3 Devroey P, Boostanfar R, Koper NP et al. A double-blind, non-inferiority RCT comparing corifollitropin alfa and recombinant FSH during the first seven days of ovarian stimulation using a GnRH antagonist protocol. Hum Reprod 2009; 24: 3063-3072
• 4 Corifollitropin alfa Ensure Study Group. Corifollitropin alfa for ovarian stimulation in IVF: a randomized trial in lower-body-weight women. Reprod Biomed Online 2010; 21: 66-76
• 5 Fatemi HM, Oberyé J, Popovic-Todorovic B et al. Corifollitropin alfa in a long GnRH agonist protocol: proof of concept trial. Fertil Steril 2010; 94: 1922-1924
• 6 Santi D, Simoni M. Biosimilar recombinant follicle stimulating hormones in infertility treatment. Expert Opin Biol Ther 2014; 14: 1399-1409
• 7 Gerrits M, Mannaerts B, Kramer H et al. First evidence of ovulation induced by oral LH agonists in healthy female volunteers of reproductive age. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2013; 98: 1558-1566
• 8 Al-Inany HG, Youssef MA, Aboulghar M et al. GnRH antagonists are safer than agonists: an update of a Cochrane review. Hum Reprod Update 2011; 17: 435
• 9 von Wolff M, Rohner S, Santi A et al. Modified natural cycle in vitro fertilization an alternative in vitro fertilization treatment with lower costs per achieved pregnancy but longer treatment time. J Reprod Med 2014; 59: 553-559
• 10 La Marca A, Sunkara SK. Individualization of controlled ovarian stimulation in IVF using ovarian reserve markers: from theory to practice. Hum Reprod Update 2014; 20: 124-140
• 11 Iliodromiti S, Anderson RA, Nelson SM. Technical and performance characteristics of anti-Müllerian hormone and antral follicle count as biomarkers of ovarian response. Hum Reprod Update 2014; pii: dmu062
• 12 Nelson SM, Klein BM, Arce JC. Comparison of antimullerian hormone levels and antral follicle count as predictor of ovarian response to controlled ovarian stimulation in good-prognosis patients at individual fertility clinics in two multicenter trials. Fertil Steril 2015; 103: 923-930.e1
• 13 Yates AP, Rustamov O, Roberts SA et al. Anti-Mullerian hormone-tailored stimulation protocols improve outcomes whilst reducing adverse effects and costs of IVF. Hum Reprod 2011; 26: 2353-2362
• 14 Nelson SM, Yates RW, Lyall H et al. Anti-Müllerian hormone-based approach to controlled ovarian stimulation for assisted conception. Hum Reprod 2009; 24: 867-875
• 15 Broer SL, van Disseldorp J, Broeze KA et al. Added value of ovarian reserve testing on patient characteristics in the prediction of ovarian response and ongoing pregnancy: an individual patient data approach. Hum Reprod Update 2013; 19: 26-36
• 16 Sunkara SK, Rittenberg V, Raine-Fenning N et al. Association between the number of eggs and live birth in IVF treatment: an analysis of 400 135 treatment cycles. Hum Reprod 2011; 26: 1768-1774
• 17 Sunkara SK, Khalaf Y, Maheshwari A et al. Association between response to ovarian stimulation and miscarriage following IVF: an analysis of 124351 IVF pregnancies. Hum Reprod 2014; 29: 1218-1224
• 18 Humaidan P, Quartarolo J, Papanikolaou EG. Preventing ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome: guidance for the clinician. Fertil Steril 2010; 94: 389-400
• 19 Youssef MA, Van der Veen F, Al-Inany HG et al. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist versus HCG for oocyte triggering in antagonist-assisted reproductive technology. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014; (10) CD008046
• 20 Beckers NG, Macklon NS, Eijkemans MJ et al. Nonsupplemented luteal phase characteristics after the administration of recombinant human chorionic gonadotropin, recombinant luteinizing hormone, or gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist to induce final oocyte maturation in in vitro fertilization patients after ovarian stimulation with recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone and GnRH antagonist cotreatment. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2003; 88: 4186-4192
• 21 Devroey P, Polyzos NP, Blockeel C. An OHSS-free clinic by segmentation of IVF treatment. Hum Reprod 2011; 26: 2593-2597
• 22 Ferraretti AP, La Marca A, Fauser BC et al. ESHRE working group on Poor Ovarian Response Definition. ESHRE consensus on the definition of ‘poor response’ to ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: the Bologna criteria. Hum Reprod 2011; 26: 1616-1624
• 23 Kolibianakis EM, Venetis CA, Bosdou JK et al. Corifollitropin alfa compared with follitropin beta in poor responders undergoing ICSI: a randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod 2015; 30: 432-440
• 24 Bosdou JK, Venetis CA, Kolibianakis EM et al. The use of androgens or androgen-modulating agents in poor responders undergoing in vitro fertilization: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update 2012; 18: 127-145
• 25 Vlahos N, Papalouka M, Triantafyllidou O et al. Dehydroepiandrosterone administration before IVF in poor responders: a prospective cohort study. Reprod Biomed Online 2015; 30: 191-196
• 26 Narkwichean A, Maalouf W, Campbell BK et al. Efficacy of dehydroepiandrosterone to improve ovarian response in women with diminished ovarian reserve: a meta-analysis. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2013; 11: 44
• 27 Zangmo R, Singh N, Kumar S et al. Role of dehydroepiandrosterone in improving oocyte and embryo quality in IVF cycles. Reprod Biomed Online 2014; 28: 743-747