Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 18, 2026

Fertility Preservation Through Oocyte Vitrification: Clinical and Laboratory Perspectives
Published on: September 16, 2021
Evaluation of ovulation induction protocols for poor responders undergoing assisted reproduction techniques
Mahnaz Ashrafi1, Saeid K Ashtiani, Fatemeh Zafarani
1Department of Female Infertility, Royan Institute, PO Box 19395-4644, Tehran, Iran. info@royaninstitute.org
Objective:
To compare 3 stimulation protocols in poor ovulation responders undergoing in-vitro fertilization (IVF).
Methods:
The study was a randomized, prospective clinical trial from June 2003 to July 2004, in Royan Institute, Tehran, Iran. One hundred and fifty-four patients, who had poor responses to ovulation induction in at least one previous IVF attempt, were randomly divided into 3 groups. In the first group, human menopausal gonadotropin (HMG) was administered from day 3 of the cycle at a dose rate of 150 IU/day. In the second group, gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist was started at a dose rate of 800 microg/day by nasal spray or 500 microg/day subcutaneously in the mid-luteal phase, followed by a standard HMG dose after pituitary down regulation was confirmed. In the third group, clomiphene at a dose rate of 100 mg/day was given from day 3 and HMG from day 6. Our main outcomes were number of mature oocytes, cancellation rate, number of HMG ampoules used and incidence premature luteinizing hormone (LH) surge.
Results:
There was a high incidence of premature LH surge in all groups except in the GnRH group (p=0.0001) and there were significant differences between groups in HMG requirements (p=0.004). There were no significant differences between groups in number of mature oocytes recovered and cancellation rate.
Conclusion:
Results showed no advantage in the use of GnRH agonist compared to the older regimens of clomiphene plus HMG and HMG alone. The cancellation rate was similar for 3 protocols and HMG requirement was higher with the use of GnRH agonist. The treatment of poor responders in assisted reproductive technologies remains a challenge.
