Native IVF cycle at woman in 46-age with clinical pregnancy

Czech version

Authors: B. Kaslová; S. Jirsová
Authors‘ workplace: Gynekologicko-porodnická klinika l. LF UK a VFN, Praha, přednosta prof. MUDr. A. Martan, DrSc.
Published in: Ceska Gynekol 2020; 85(3): 201-205
Category: Case Report

Overview

Objective: To present a case of a patient who was treated for a sterility at the age of 46. The treatment was successful, after that we confirmed a clinical pregnancy. We present the treatment procedure in this case and summarize other treatment options in patiens over 40 years of age.

Design: Case report.

Setting: The Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1st Faculty of Medicine, Charles University and the General Faculty Hospital Prague 2.

Case report: Infertility treatment in patiens over 40 years is often without the desired result, it is often difficult for both the patient and the attending physician. We describe the case in which a patient became pregnant using her own oocytes obtained from a puncture from the native IVF cycle.

Conclusion: Treatment management in patients over forty years of age offers several options, above all it is necessary to choose a couple whether they want to undergo treatment with their own or donated oocytes. Pregnancy in patiens over 40 years of age using treatment with thein own oocytes is significantly less successful. There is also a decrease in the chances of a continuing physiologically progressing pregnancy and the birth of a healthy offspring, compared to younger patients. We recommend spreading this information to women's awareness.

Keywords:

IVF – treatment of infertility – age of women – native IVF

Sources

1. Bentzen, JG., et al. Ovarian reserve parameters: a comparison between users and non-users of hormonal contra-ception. Reproductive BioMedicine Online, 2012, http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2012.09.001.

2. Beurteilungsmöglichkeiten der ovariellen Reserve. J Gynäkolog Endokrinol, 2010, 4(3, Ausgabe für Österreich), s. 14–19.

3. Dostál, J., Březinová J., Svobodová, M. Minimální stimulace v programu IVF/ICSI+ET. Prakt Gyn, 2005, 9(2), p. 10–12.

4. Edwards, RG. IVF, IVM, natural cycle IVF, minimal stimulation IVF – time for a rethink. Reprod Biomed Online, 2007, 15(1), p. 106–119.

5. Frelich, J. Statistika & my. Praha: Český statistický úřad, 2018, 9, s. 24–35.

6. Mardešič, T. Diagnostika a léčba poruch plodnosti. 1. Praha: Grada, 2013.

7. Paseková, V., Mardešić, T. Možnosti IVF v nativním cyklu. Čes Gynek, 2012, 77(2), s. 175–178.

8. Pelinck, MJ., Vogel, NEA., Hoek, A., et al. Minimal stimulation IVF with late folicular phase administration of the GnRH antagonist cetrorelix and concomitant substitution with recombinant FSH: a pilot study. Hum Reprod, 2005, 20, p. 642–648.

9. Řezáčová, J., et al. Reprodukční medicína. Praha: Mladá fronta, 2018.

10. Řežábek, K., Pohlová, R. Asistovaná reprodukce v ČR 2017. 1. Praha: UZIS, NRAR, 2019. https://www.uzis.cz/res/f/008274/ asistreprodukce2017.pdf.

11. Sneeringer, R. Pregnancy loss in the first in vitro fertilization cycle is not a predictive of subsequent delivery in women over 40 years. Fertil Steril, 2008, 89(2).

12. Ubaldi, F., Rienzi, L., Baroni, E., et al. Hopes and facts about mild ovarian stimulation. Reprod Biomed Online, 2007, 14(6), p. 675–681.

13. Žáková, J., Ventruba, P., Crha, I., et. al. Možnost využití darovaných gamet nebo embryí při léčbě neplodnosti. Prakt Gyn, 2006, 10(3), s. 105.