Objective To compare in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer( IVF-ET ) outcome of gonadotropin-releasing hormone( GnRH ) antagonist protocol and GnRH agonist long protocol in patients with polycystic ovary syndrome ( PCOS)and to provide reference for rational selection of ovulation stimulation protocol for PCOS patients. Methods One hundred and four patients with PCOS who underwent IVF-ET were randomly divided into two groups. In the study group,41 patients were subjected to the GnRH antagonist protocol;In the control group,63 patients were subjected to a long protocol of GnRH agonist. Doses and duration of gonadotropin therapy,the thickness of endometrium and the profile of hormone level on the day of HCG administration,the number of retrieved oocytes,the ratio of fertilization,the ratio of cleavage,the ratio of the good quantity embryos,implantation rate of embryo,pregnancy rate,the cycle cancellation rate and the incidence rate of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome( OHSS)were recorded. Results The IVF-ET outcome of the two groups was similar with respects to the number of oocytes,the ratio of fertilization,the ratio of cleavage,implantation rate of embryo and the pregnancy rate( P﹥0. 05). Significant differences were found(P﹤0. 05)between the two groups regarding to the doses and duration of gonadotropin therapy,the levels of serum E2 and LH on the day of HCG administration,and the cycle cancellation rate. The incidence rate of OHSS was not significantly different ( 2. 44% vs. 12. 70%) between the two groups. Conclusion The duration of gonadotropins administration,the cycle cancellation rate,incidence of OHSS and the financial burdern are reduced in patients treated with GnRH antagonist. The growth of follicle,the ratio of fertilization,the ratio of cleavage,implantation rate of embryo and the pregnancy rate are not different between the two methods. The GnRH antagonist protocol is optimal for patients with PCOS.

Perimenopausal syndrome （MPS）， a common endocrine system disease， is one of the diseases responding specifically to traditional Chinese medicine （TCM）. The China Association of Chinese Medicine organized experts in endocrinology， gynecology， and interdisciplinary fields of both Western and Chinese medicine to discuss the advantages and challenges of diagnosing and treating MPS with Western medicine， TCM， and integrative medicine. Experts at the conference believe that MPS is initiated by estrogen decline and rooted in deficiency， with the pathogenesis being imbalance between Yin and Yang in the kidney. The hormone replacement therapy in Western medicine for menopause can rapidly alleviate related symptoms by quickly restoring the estrogen level and timely detect and delay complications of menopause， whereas such a therapy has certain risks， necessitating close monitoring of adverse reactions. Moreover， the various contraindications and precautions limit the clinical application of the hormone replacement therapy. TCM has advantages in synergistically alleviating symptoms such as hot flashes， sweating， sleep disorders， and emotional abnormalities of MPS without causing obvious adverse reactions. However， its efficacy is slower than the hormone replacement therapy， and the TCM evidence for preventing and treating complications of menopause remains unclear. Three suggestions were proposed for the future development of both Western and TCM for ameliorating MPS. First， an integrated diagnosis and treatment system for MPS with both Western and Chinese medicine should be established. Second， high-quality evidence-based interventions for MPS should be developed with TCM alone or in combination with Western medicine. Third， efforts should be made to promote the new TCM drug development and the interdisciplinary cooperation for treating MPS.