ICSI does not offer any benefit over conventional IVF across different ovarian response categories in non-male factor infertility: a European multicenter analysis
Purpose To evaluate whether ICSI offers any benefit compared with IVF in different ovarian response categories in case of non-male factor infertility. Methods This is a retrospective multicenter analysis using individual patient data, conducted in 15 tertiary referral hospitals in Europe (1 center i...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics 2019-10, Vol.36 (10), p.2067-2076 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 2076 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 10 |
| container_start_page | 2067 |
| container_title | Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics |
| container_volume | 36 |
| creator | Drakopoulos, Panagiotis Garcia-Velasco, Juan Bosch, Ernesto Blockeel, Christophe de Vos, Michel Santos-Ribeiro, Samuel Makrigiannakis, Antonis Tournaye, Herman Polyzos, Nikolaos P. |
| description | Purpose
To evaluate whether ICSI offers any benefit compared with IVF in different ovarian response categories in case of non-male factor infertility.
Methods
This is a retrospective multicenter analysis using individual patient data, conducted in 15 tertiary referral hospitals in Europe (1 center in Belgium and 14 in Spain). The study included the first cycle of all patients undergoing ovarian stimulation for IVF or ICSI in a GnRH antagonist protocol. Only patients having either IVF or ICSI for non-male factor infertility were included. Patients were divided into 4 groups based on their ovarian response as follows: group A, poor responders (1–3 oocytes); group B, suboptimal responders (4–9 oocytes); group C, normal responders (10–15 oocytes); group D, high responders (> 15 oocytes).
Results
In total, 4891 patients were analyzed, of whom 4227 underwent ICSI and 664 IVF. There was no significant difference for the insemination method (ICSI vs. IVF) used among the different ovarian response categories: 87% vs. 13%, 87% vs. 13%, 86% vs. 14%, 84% vs. 16%, for groups A, B, C, and D, respectively,
p
value = 0.35. Mean fertilization rates and embryo utilization rates were comparable between IVF and ICSI in the whole cohort. Fresh and cumulative LBR did not differ significantly for IVF and ICSI in poor, suboptimal, normal, and high responders.
Conclusion
There is no advantage of ICSI over IVF as insemination method for non-male factor infertility, irrespective of the ovarian response. The number of oocytes retrieved has no value for the selection of the insemination procedure in case of non-male infertility. |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1007/s10815-019-01563-1 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_6823343</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2290956554</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-9ce42a0150bcbc53ecb61df5c2ae3484f6920c4f1b3859412d12999e684d0f293</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kk1v1DAQhiMEoqXwBzggS1y4BPyZxByQqlULK1XiwMfVcpzx4iprL3ay0v4dfimT3VI-DhwsWzPPvB6_nqp6zuhrRmn7pjDaMVVTpnGpRtTsQXXOVCvqVgj6EM9UdTWVTXdWPSnlllKqOy4eV2eCSUm1as-rH-vVpzUZEhQS00SS95CJjQfSQwQfMLLHgEtxD3EKKdqRrL9eE-tyKoUMYeExg5jNwUaSoexSLECcnWCTckDhEFE71ls7AvHWTSljCOumMIbp8JZYcjXntAMs387jFBwKHruw46GE8rR65O1Y4NndflF9ub76vPpQ33x8v15d3tROtnKqtQPJLRpBe9c7JcD1DRu8ctyCkJ30jebUSc960SktGR8Y11pD08mBeq7FRfXupLub-y0MSxfZjmaXw9bmg0k2mL8zMXwzm7Q3DZoqpECBV3cCOX2foUxmG4qDcbQR0lwM5xpNb5SSiL78B71Nc8YHL1Tbtsg0DCl-oo5uZ_D3zTBqlhEwpxEwOALmOAJmKXrx5zPuS379OQLiBBRMxQ3k33f_R_Yn8E_AGQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2277755461</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>ICSI does not offer any benefit over conventional IVF across different ovarian response categories in non-male factor infertility: a European multicenter analysis</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>SpringerNature Journals</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><creator>Drakopoulos, Panagiotis ; Garcia-Velasco, Juan ; Bosch, Ernesto ; Blockeel, Christophe ; de Vos, Michel ; Santos-Ribeiro, Samuel ; Makrigiannakis, Antonis ; Tournaye, Herman ; Polyzos, Nikolaos P.</creator><creatorcontrib>Drakopoulos, Panagiotis ; Garcia-Velasco, Juan ; Bosch, Ernesto ; Blockeel, Christophe ; de Vos, Michel ; Santos-Ribeiro, Samuel ; Makrigiannakis, Antonis ; Tournaye, Herman ; Polyzos, Nikolaos P.</creatorcontrib><description>Purpose
To evaluate whether ICSI offers any benefit compared with IVF in different ovarian response categories in case of non-male factor infertility.
Methods
This is a retrospective multicenter analysis using individual patient data, conducted in 15 tertiary referral hospitals in Europe (1 center in Belgium and 14 in Spain). The study included the first cycle of all patients undergoing ovarian stimulation for IVF or ICSI in a GnRH antagonist protocol. Only patients having either IVF or ICSI for non-male factor infertility were included. Patients were divided into 4 groups based on their ovarian response as follows: group A, poor responders (1–3 oocytes); group B, suboptimal responders (4–9 oocytes); group C, normal responders (10–15 oocytes); group D, high responders (> 15 oocytes).
Results
In total, 4891 patients were analyzed, of whom 4227 underwent ICSI and 664 IVF. There was no significant difference for the insemination method (ICSI vs. IVF) used among the different ovarian response categories: 87% vs. 13%, 87% vs. 13%, 86% vs. 14%, 84% vs. 16%, for groups A, B, C, and D, respectively,
p
value = 0.35. Mean fertilization rates and embryo utilization rates were comparable between IVF and ICSI in the whole cohort. Fresh and cumulative LBR did not differ significantly for IVF and ICSI in poor, suboptimal, normal, and high responders.
Conclusion
There is no advantage of ICSI over IVF as insemination method for non-male factor infertility, irrespective of the ovarian response. The number of oocytes retrieved has no value for the selection of the insemination procedure in case of non-male infertility.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1058-0468</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1573-7330</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1007/s10815-019-01563-1</identifier><identifier>PMID: 31440957</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>New York: Springer US</publisher><subject>Adult ; Assisted Reproduction Technologies ; Birth Rate ; Europe - epidemiology ; Female ; Fertilization ; Fertilization in Vitro - methods ; Gonadotropin-releasing hormone ; Gynecology ; Human Genetics ; Humans ; Infertility ; Infertility - genetics ; Infertility - physiopathology ; Male ; Medicine ; Medicine & Public Health ; Oocyte Retrieval - methods ; Oocytes ; Oocytes - growth & development ; Oocytes - pathology ; Ovary - growth & development ; Ovary - metabolism ; Ovulation Induction ; Pregnancy ; Pregnancy Rate ; Reproductive Medicine ; Spain - epidemiology ; Sperm Injections, Intracytoplasmic - methods</subject><ispartof>Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2019-10, Vol.36 (10), p.2067-2076</ispartof><rights>Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019</rights><rights>Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics is a copyright of Springer, (2019). All Rights Reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-9ce42a0150bcbc53ecb61df5c2ae3484f6920c4f1b3859412d12999e684d0f293</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-9ce42a0150bcbc53ecb61df5c2ae3484f6920c4f1b3859412d12999e684d0f293</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-9262-785X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6823343/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6823343/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,315,729,782,786,887,27931,27932,41495,42564,51326,53798,53800</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31440957$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Drakopoulos, Panagiotis</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Garcia-Velasco, Juan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bosch, Ernesto</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Blockeel, Christophe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Vos, Michel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Santos-Ribeiro, Samuel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Makrigiannakis, Antonis</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tournaye, Herman</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Polyzos, Nikolaos P.</creatorcontrib><title>ICSI does not offer any benefit over conventional IVF across different ovarian response categories in non-male factor infertility: a European multicenter analysis</title><title>Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics</title><addtitle>J Assist Reprod Genet</addtitle><addtitle>J Assist Reprod Genet</addtitle><description>Purpose
To evaluate whether ICSI offers any benefit compared with IVF in different ovarian response categories in case of non-male factor infertility.
Methods
This is a retrospective multicenter analysis using individual patient data, conducted in 15 tertiary referral hospitals in Europe (1 center in Belgium and 14 in Spain). The study included the first cycle of all patients undergoing ovarian stimulation for IVF or ICSI in a GnRH antagonist protocol. Only patients having either IVF or ICSI for non-male factor infertility were included. Patients were divided into 4 groups based on their ovarian response as follows: group A, poor responders (1–3 oocytes); group B, suboptimal responders (4–9 oocytes); group C, normal responders (10–15 oocytes); group D, high responders (> 15 oocytes).
Results
In total, 4891 patients were analyzed, of whom 4227 underwent ICSI and 664 IVF. There was no significant difference for the insemination method (ICSI vs. IVF) used among the different ovarian response categories: 87% vs. 13%, 87% vs. 13%, 86% vs. 14%, 84% vs. 16%, for groups A, B, C, and D, respectively,
p
value = 0.35. Mean fertilization rates and embryo utilization rates were comparable between IVF and ICSI in the whole cohort. Fresh and cumulative LBR did not differ significantly for IVF and ICSI in poor, suboptimal, normal, and high responders.
Conclusion
There is no advantage of ICSI over IVF as insemination method for non-male factor infertility, irrespective of the ovarian response. The number of oocytes retrieved has no value for the selection of the insemination procedure in case of non-male infertility.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Assisted Reproduction Technologies</subject><subject>Birth Rate</subject><subject>Europe - epidemiology</subject><subject>Female</subject><subject>Fertilization</subject><subject>Fertilization in Vitro - methods</subject><subject>Gonadotropin-releasing hormone</subject><subject>Gynecology</subject><subject>Human Genetics</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Infertility</subject><subject>Infertility - genetics</subject><subject>Infertility - physiopathology</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Medicine</subject><subject>Medicine & Public Health</subject><subject>Oocyte Retrieval - methods</subject><subject>Oocytes</subject><subject>Oocytes - growth & development</subject><subject>Oocytes - pathology</subject><subject>Ovary - growth & development</subject><subject>Ovary - metabolism</subject><subject>Ovulation Induction</subject><subject>Pregnancy</subject><subject>Pregnancy Rate</subject><subject>Reproductive Medicine</subject><subject>Spain - epidemiology</subject><subject>Sperm Injections, Intracytoplasmic - methods</subject><issn>1058-0468</issn><issn>1573-7330</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2019</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><sourceid>ABUWG</sourceid><sourceid>AFKRA</sourceid><sourceid>AZQEC</sourceid><sourceid>BENPR</sourceid><sourceid>CCPQU</sourceid><sourceid>DWQXO</sourceid><sourceid>GNUQQ</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kk1v1DAQhiMEoqXwBzggS1y4BPyZxByQqlULK1XiwMfVcpzx4iprL3ay0v4dfimT3VI-DhwsWzPPvB6_nqp6zuhrRmn7pjDaMVVTpnGpRtTsQXXOVCvqVgj6EM9UdTWVTXdWPSnlllKqOy4eV2eCSUm1as-rH-vVpzUZEhQS00SS95CJjQfSQwQfMLLHgEtxD3EKKdqRrL9eE-tyKoUMYeExg5jNwUaSoexSLECcnWCTckDhEFE71ls7AvHWTSljCOumMIbp8JZYcjXntAMs387jFBwKHruw46GE8rR65O1Y4NndflF9ub76vPpQ33x8v15d3tROtnKqtQPJLRpBe9c7JcD1DRu8ctyCkJ30jebUSc960SktGR8Y11pD08mBeq7FRfXupLub-y0MSxfZjmaXw9bmg0k2mL8zMXwzm7Q3DZoqpECBV3cCOX2foUxmG4qDcbQR0lwM5xpNb5SSiL78B71Nc8YHL1Tbtsg0DCl-oo5uZ_D3zTBqlhEwpxEwOALmOAJmKXrx5zPuS379OQLiBBRMxQ3k33f_R_Yn8E_AGQ</recordid><startdate>20191001</startdate><enddate>20191001</enddate><creator>Drakopoulos, Panagiotis</creator><creator>Garcia-Velasco, Juan</creator><creator>Bosch, Ernesto</creator><creator>Blockeel, Christophe</creator><creator>de Vos, Michel</creator><creator>Santos-Ribeiro, Samuel</creator><creator>Makrigiannakis, Antonis</creator><creator>Tournaye, Herman</creator><creator>Polyzos, Nikolaos P.</creator><general>Springer US</general><general>Springer Nature B.V</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8C1</scope><scope>8FD</scope><scope>8FE</scope><scope>8FH</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BBNVY</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BHPHI</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FR3</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>HCIFZ</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>LK8</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M7P</scope><scope>P64</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>RC3</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9262-785X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20191001</creationdate><title>ICSI does not offer any benefit over conventional IVF across different ovarian response categories in non-male factor infertility: a European multicenter analysis</title><author>Drakopoulos, Panagiotis ; Garcia-Velasco, Juan ; Bosch, Ernesto ; Blockeel, Christophe ; de Vos, Michel ; Santos-Ribeiro, Samuel ; Makrigiannakis, Antonis ; Tournaye, Herman ; Polyzos, Nikolaos P.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c474t-9ce42a0150bcbc53ecb61df5c2ae3484f6920c4f1b3859412d12999e684d0f293</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2019</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Assisted Reproduction Technologies</topic><topic>Birth Rate</topic><topic>Europe - epidemiology</topic><topic>Female</topic><topic>Fertilization</topic><topic>Fertilization in Vitro - methods</topic><topic>Gonadotropin-releasing hormone</topic><topic>Gynecology</topic><topic>Human Genetics</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Infertility</topic><topic>Infertility - genetics</topic><topic>Infertility - physiopathology</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Medicine</topic><topic>Medicine & Public Health</topic><topic>Oocyte Retrieval - methods</topic><topic>Oocytes</topic><topic>Oocytes - growth & development</topic><topic>Oocytes - pathology</topic><topic>Ovary - growth & development</topic><topic>Ovary - metabolism</topic><topic>Ovulation Induction</topic><topic>Pregnancy</topic><topic>Pregnancy Rate</topic><topic>Reproductive Medicine</topic><topic>Spain - epidemiology</topic><topic>Sperm Injections, Intracytoplasmic - methods</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Drakopoulos, Panagiotis</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Garcia-Velasco, Juan</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bosch, Ernesto</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Blockeel, Christophe</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>de Vos, Michel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Santos-Ribeiro, Samuel</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Makrigiannakis, Antonis</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tournaye, Herman</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Polyzos, Nikolaos P.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Public Health Database</collection><collection>Technology Research Database</collection><collection>ProQuest SciTech Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Natural Science Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Korea</collection><collection>Engineering Research Database</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>SciTech Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Biological Science Collection</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>Biological Science Database</collection><collection>Biotechnology and BioEngineering Abstracts</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>Genetics Abstracts</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Drakopoulos, Panagiotis</au><au>Garcia-Velasco, Juan</au><au>Bosch, Ernesto</au><au>Blockeel, Christophe</au><au>de Vos, Michel</au><au>Santos-Ribeiro, Samuel</au><au>Makrigiannakis, Antonis</au><au>Tournaye, Herman</au><au>Polyzos, Nikolaos P.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>ICSI does not offer any benefit over conventional IVF across different ovarian response categories in non-male factor infertility: a European multicenter analysis</atitle><jtitle>Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics</jtitle><stitle>J Assist Reprod Genet</stitle><addtitle>J Assist Reprod Genet</addtitle><date>2019-10-01</date><risdate>2019</risdate><volume>36</volume><issue>10</issue><spage>2067</spage><epage>2076</epage><pages>2067-2076</pages><issn>1058-0468</issn><eissn>1573-7330</eissn><abstract>Purpose
To evaluate whether ICSI offers any benefit compared with IVF in different ovarian response categories in case of non-male factor infertility.
Methods
This is a retrospective multicenter analysis using individual patient data, conducted in 15 tertiary referral hospitals in Europe (1 center in Belgium and 14 in Spain). The study included the first cycle of all patients undergoing ovarian stimulation for IVF or ICSI in a GnRH antagonist protocol. Only patients having either IVF or ICSI for non-male factor infertility were included. Patients were divided into 4 groups based on their ovarian response as follows: group A, poor responders (1–3 oocytes); group B, suboptimal responders (4–9 oocytes); group C, normal responders (10–15 oocytes); group D, high responders (> 15 oocytes).
Results
In total, 4891 patients were analyzed, of whom 4227 underwent ICSI and 664 IVF. There was no significant difference for the insemination method (ICSI vs. IVF) used among the different ovarian response categories: 87% vs. 13%, 87% vs. 13%, 86% vs. 14%, 84% vs. 16%, for groups A, B, C, and D, respectively,
p
value = 0.35. Mean fertilization rates and embryo utilization rates were comparable between IVF and ICSI in the whole cohort. Fresh and cumulative LBR did not differ significantly for IVF and ICSI in poor, suboptimal, normal, and high responders.
Conclusion
There is no advantage of ICSI over IVF as insemination method for non-male factor infertility, irrespective of the ovarian response. The number of oocytes retrieved has no value for the selection of the insemination procedure in case of non-male infertility.</abstract><cop>New York</cop><pub>Springer US</pub><pmid>31440957</pmid><doi>10.1007/s10815-019-01563-1</doi><tpages>10</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9262-785X</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 1058-0468 |
| ispartof | Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2019-10, Vol.36 (10), p.2067-2076 |
| issn | 1058-0468 1573-7330 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_6823343 |
| source | MEDLINE; SpringerNature Journals; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central |
| subjects | Adult Assisted Reproduction Technologies Birth Rate Europe - epidemiology Female Fertilization Fertilization in Vitro - methods Gonadotropin-releasing hormone Gynecology Human Genetics Humans Infertility Infertility - genetics Infertility - physiopathology Male Medicine Medicine & Public Health Oocyte Retrieval - methods Oocytes Oocytes - growth & development Oocytes - pathology Ovary - growth & development Ovary - metabolism Ovulation Induction Pregnancy Pregnancy Rate Reproductive Medicine Spain - epidemiology Sperm Injections, Intracytoplasmic - methods |
| title | ICSI does not offer any benefit over conventional IVF across different ovarian response categories in non-male factor infertility: a European multicenter analysis |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-03T23%3A01%3A37IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=ICSI%20does%20not%20offer%20any%20benefit%20over%20conventional%20IVF%20across%20different%20ovarian%20response%20categories%20in%20non-male%20factor%20infertility:%20a%20European%20multicenter%20analysis&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20assisted%20reproduction%20and%20genetics&rft.au=Drakopoulos,%20Panagiotis&rft.date=2019-10-01&rft.volume=36&rft.issue=10&rft.spage=2067&rft.epage=2076&rft.pages=2067-2076&rft.issn=1058-0468&rft.eissn=1573-7330&rft_id=info:doi/10.1007/s10815-019-01563-1&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2290956554%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2277755461&rft_id=info:pmid/31440957&rfr_iscdi=true |