Clinical application and outcomes of natural cycle and modified natural cycle IVF for individualized assisted reproduction among patients with DOR
10.3760/cma.j.cn101441-20250406-00171
- VernacularTitle:自然周期与改良自然周期体外受精在DOR患者个体化辅助生殖中的临床应用及结局评估
- Author:
Jiaxin LYU
1
;
Wei GUO
;
Nana LIU
;
Tian TIAN
;
Lixue CHEN
;
Xiumei ZHEN
;
Rong LI
;
Rui YANG
;
Jie QIAO
Author Information
1. 北京大学第三医院妇产科生殖医学中心 国家妇产疾病临床医学研究中心，北京 100191
- Publication Type:Journal Article
- Keywords:
Pregnancy outcome;
Diminished ovarian reserve;
Natural cycle;
Modified natural cycle;
Laboratory outcome
- From:
Chinese Journal of Reproduction and Contraception
2025;45(9):902-909
- CountryChina
- Language:Chinese
-
Abstract:
Objective:To investigate the outcomes of natural cycle (NC) and modified natural cycle (MNC) assisted reproductive technology (ART) in patients with diminished ovarian reserve (DOR), and to provide a scientific basis for individualized treatment strategies for DOR patients.Methods:A retrospective cohort analysis was performed on the clinical data of DOR patients who underwent ART at the Center for Reproductive Medicine of the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Peking University Third Hospital from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2023. Patients were divided into the NC group ( n=801) and the MNC group ( n=385) based on their treatment protocol. The primary outcomes were cycle cancellation rate and oocyte retrieval rate. Secondary outcomes included clinical pregnancy rate and live birth rate per fresh embryo transfer cycle and frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycle, cumulative pregnancy rate and cumulative live birth rate per started cycle and per transfer cycle, as well as laboratory parameters such as the number of retrieved oocytes, the number of two pronuclei (2PN) fertilized oocytes, the number of transferable embryos, and transferable embryo formation rate. Further, multivariate logistic regression was used to analyze the impact of the treatment protocol on pregnancy and live birth outcomes. Results:There were no statistically significant differences between the NC and MNC groups in terms of general characteristics such as age, body mass index, and baseline hormone levels (all P>0.05). The cycle cancellation rate was significantly higher in the NC group [19.10% (153/801)] than in the MNC group [10.65% (41/385), P<0.001], and the oocyte retrieval rate was significantly lower in the NC group [66.31% (431/650)] than in the MNC group [74.86% (259/346), P=0.005]. The number of retrieved oocytes [1 (0,1)], the number of 2PN fertilized oocytes [1 (0,1)], and the number of transferable embryos [0 (0, 1)] were also significantly lower in the NC group than in the MNC group [1 (1, 2), P<0.001; 1 (1, 1), P<0.001; 0 (0, 1), P<0.001]. However, there were no statistically significant differences in 2PN fertilization rate and transferable embryo formation rate between the NC and MNC groups (all P>0.05). In both fresh embryo transfer cycles and frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles, there were no statistically significant differences in clinical pregnancy rate and live birth rate between the NC and MNC groups (all P>0.05). The cumulative pregnancy rate per started cycle and transfer cycle, the cumulative live birth rate per started cycle and per transfer cycle were also not significantly different between the NC and MNC groups (all P>0.05). Multivariate logistic analysis showed no significant association between NC and clinical pregnancy or live birth compared with MNC. Conclusion:While MNC to some extent reduced the cycle cancellation rate and improved oocyte retrieval rates compared with NC, it did not ultimately improve pregnancy outcomes in DOR patients.
