Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 24, 2026
Fertility Preservation Through Oocyte Vitrification: Clinical and Laboratory Perspectives
Published on: September 16, 2021
Comparison of mild ovarian stimulation with conventional ovarian stimulation in poor responders
Ji Hee Yoo1, Sun Hwa Cha, Chan Woo Park
1Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Cheil General Hospital and Women's Healthcare Center, Kwandong University College of Medicine, Seoul, Korea.
Objective:
To compare the IVF outcomes of mild ovarian stimulation with conventional ovarian stimulation in poor responders.
Methods:
From 2004 to 2009, 389 IVF cycles in 285 women showed poor responses (defined as either a basal FSH level ≥12 mIU/mL, or the number of retrieved oocytes ≤3, or serum E(2) level on hCG day <500 pg/mL) were analyzed, retrospectively. In total, 119 cycles with mild ovarian stimulation (m-IVF) and 270 cycles with conventional ovarian stimulation (c-IVF) were included. Both groups were divided based on their age, into groups over and under 37 years old.
Results:
The m-IVF group was lower than the c-IVF group in the duration of stimulation, total doses of gonadotropins used, serum E(2) level on hCG day, the number of retrieved oocytes, and the number of mature oocytes. However, there was no significant difference in the number of good embryos, the number of transferred embryos, the cancellation rate, or the clinical pregnancy rate. In the m-IVF group over 37 years old, the clinical pregnancy rate and live birth rate were higher when compared with the c-IVF group, but this result was not statistically significant.
Conclusion:
In poor responder groups, mild ovarian stimulation is more cost effective and patient friendly than conventional IVF. Therefore, we suggest that mild ovarian stimulation could be considered for poor responders over 37 years old.
