BackgroundWhen stimulating a patient with poor ovarian response for IVF, the maximal dose of gonadotropins injected is often determined by arbitrary standards rather than a measured response. The purpose of this study was to determine if serum FSH concentration during an IVF stimulation cycle reflects follicular utilization of FSH and whether serum FSH values may inform dose adjustments of exogenous FSH.MethodsIn this retrospective cross sectional study we studied 155 consecutive IVF cycles stimulated only with recombinant human FSH. We only included long GnRH agonist protocols in which endogenous FSH levels were suppressed. We correlated the serum concentration of cycle day (CD) 7 FSH with the number of oocytes retrieved, cleaving embryos and pregnancy rate.ResultsWe found that a CD7 FSH concentration above 22 IU/L was associated with poor response regardless of the daily dose of FSH injected and a lower pregnancy rate.ConclusionsWe concluded that CD7 FSH concentration during stimulation could be used to guide FSH dosing in poor responders. If the CD7 FSH concentration is above 22 IU/L increasing the dose of FSH in an attempt to recruit more growing follicles is unlikely to be successful.
Maternal protein-energy restriction (25% of the ad libitum intake) during the first 10 days of pregnancy resulted in severely altered fetal growth rates. Fetal development was assessed by body weight, brain weight, brain DNA, and brain protein content on fetal days 16, 18, 20 and at term. The individual placentas were also examined (weight, DNA and protein content) on each of these fetal days. Progesterone was administered commencing with day 3 of pregnancy until the day Caesarian section was done, in an attempt to rehabilitate placental development. This treatment did not improve placental development on fetal days 16 or 18. However, fetal development was significantly improved on day 16 and day 20, as compared to the dietary-restricted group without progesterone.
Objective: Women with germline BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants have a significantly elevated lifetime risk of ovarian and fallopian tube cancer. Bilateral salpingo-oophorectomy (RRSO) is associated with a 90% reduction in the development of tubal and ovarian cancer. At our tertiary hospital, we have a dedicated clinic where women predisposed to hereditary ovarian/tubal cancer receive counseling on reproduction, risk reduction, surgical prophylaxis, and menopausal aftercare. The objective of this study was to evaluate the choices that Canadian women with BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants make regarding ovarian cancer risk reduction within this highly specialized multidisciplinary clinic.Methods: This retrospective chart review included all women with confirmed BRCA1/2 mutations referred to the Familial Ovarian Cancer Clinic at Women's College Hospital, Toronto, Canada over a 45-month time period. Patient demographics, preoperative consultation notes and investigations, intraoperative findings, and pathology were recorded.Results: A total of 191 women were included in our cohort; 140 (73.3%) underwent risk-reducing surgery and 51 (26.7%) deferred or declined surgery. In women who underwent surgical prevention (median age 45 [30-72] y), 123 (87.9%) underwent RRSO and 17 (12.1%) chose a risk-reducing bilateral salpingectomy with deferred oophorectomy. Of the women undergoing RRSO, 11 (8.9%) women chose concurrent hysterectomy. Prevalent themes affecting decision-making included fears around premature surgical menopause, family planning, and concerns around development of endometrial cancer related to tamoxifen.Conclusion: Women with BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants face challenging decisions regarding risk reduction and care providers must be knowledgeable and supportive in helping women make informed and individualized choices about their care.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.