Is it possible to help patients of older reproductive age implement their reproductive function within the framework of IVF and PE programs backed by state support?

The effectiveness of the basic in vitro fertilization (IVF) and embryo transfer (PE) programs that were state funded using the funds of the Mandatory Health Insurance Fund (MHIF) was compared with the comprehensive programs that were co-financed (along with the funds of the MHIF, the parallel payment of donor oocytes (DO), donor embryos (DE) (or a donor program from own funds)) in patients of older reproductive age with low ovarian reserve and the forecast of “poor” and reduced ovarian response to controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) on the basis of the Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) Department of the Moscow Regional Perinatal Center (MRPC). We analysed the outcomes of the programs that have been implemented using the funds of the MHIF on the basis of the ART Department for 2015 and 2016 in patients, who were divided into 2 groups. Group 1 consisted of 69 patients who underwent a basic IVF and PE program in 2015, Group 2 included 60 patients who underwent the basic and comprehensive IVF and PE programs in 2016. In addition, Subgroup 2 has been singled out from Group 2 and included 26 patients out of 60 who underwent the comprehensive IVF and PE programs. The groups were comparable by the main indicators of the ovarian reserve, the average age and the anamnestic data. The embryos were cultivated up to 5 days, their quality was assessed according to the Gardner scale. The number of oocytes obtained (of which mature ones per 1 patient) was (p< 0.05): in Group 1 - 3.7 ± 1.1/2.7 ± 1.8, in Group 2 - 4.7 ± 2.2 / 4.1 ± 1.2, in Group 2a - 7.7 ± 3.4 / 5.7 ± 2.4. The number of embryos received per patient (of which, the highest quality embryos) (p< 0.05): in Group 1 - 2.1 ± 1.1/1.1 ± 0,4, in Group 2 - 2.9 ± 1.4/1.8 ± 0,8; in Group 2a, 4.4 ± 1.8/2.7 ± 1.2. In all patients, the embryos were transferred on Day 5 of the cultivation. In the course of the comprehensive programs, two embryos were transferred: one embryo was obtained by fertilizing the patient’s oocytes with the husband’s semen (of medium or low quality), the other embryo was obtained from a donor by fertilizing with the husband’s sperm (of high quality). In the absence of their own embryos, two high quality DE or embryos obtained by fertilization with the husband’s semen were transferred. The effectiveness of the IVF program (frequency of pregnancy) was as follows: Group 1 - 11.6% per IVF cycle; Group 2 - 21.6% per cycle (13), Group 2a - 38.4% per cycle.

1. Boyarsky KYu. Factors determining the ovarian reserve. Akush. and Zhen. Bol., 2009, 2: 65-69.

2. Nazarenko TA, Mishieva NG. Infertility and age. М.: MEDpress-inform, 2014: 7-22.

3. Russian Association of Human Reproduction. Assisted Reproductive Technology Register, 2014 Report.

4. Nazarenko TA, Krasnopolskaya KV. Poor response. М.: MEDPRESS-INFORM, 2012. 80 с.

5. Kuzmichev LN, Shtyrya YuA. In vitro fertilization. Only facts. M.: OOO MK, 2012. 128 p.

6. Sagamonova KYu et al. Decrease or absence of an ovarian reserve? Where is the boundary line? Materials of the 25th International RAHR Conference «Reproductive Technologies Today and Tomorrow», September 9-12, 2015, Sochi. p. 24.

7. Rudakova EB, Zamakhovskaya LYu., Strizhova TV et al. Outcomes of in vitro fertilization as a multifactorial problem of clinical reproductology. Meditsinsky Sovet, 2015, 9: 46-54.

8. ЕSHRE consensus on the definition of ‘poor response’ to ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: the Bologna criteria. Hum Reprod, 2011, 26(7): 1616-1624. doi: 0.1093/humrep/der092. First published online: April 19, 2011.

9. Ferraretti AP et al. ESHRE consensus on the definition of ‘poor response’to ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: the Bologna criteria. Human reproduction, 2011, 26.

10. Burduli AG, Aliyeva KU. Predicting hypoovarian response in ART. Materials of the 25th International RAHR Conference «Reproductive Technologies Today and Tomorrow», September 7- 10, 2016, Moscow. P. 118-119.

11. Kogan IYu, Gagayan AM, Lesik EA. Ovarian stimulation protocols during the IVF cycles: a guide for physicians. Moscow: GEOTAR-Media, 2017.

12. Ata B et al. Array CGH analysis shows that aneuploidy is not related to the number of embryos generated. Reprod Biomed Online, 2012, 24: 614- 620.

13. Krasnopolskaya KV, Nazarenko TA. Clinical aspects of the infertility treatment in marriage. Diagnosis and therapeutic programs using methods for restoring natural fertility and assisted reproductive technologies: a guide. Moscow: GEOTARMedia, 2013. 376 p.

14. Krasnopolskaya KV, Nazarenko TA, Beketova AN, Ivakhnenko VN. Effect of pergoveris and monotherapy with a high starting dose of FSH (> 300 IU) on the effectiveness of IVF in patients. Problemy Reproduktsii, 2013, 3: 32-37.

15. Podzolkova NM, Koloda YuA. Overcoming the «poor» response in ART programs: new therapeutic options. Problemy Reproduktsii, 2012, 2: 77-82.

16. Teramoto S, Kato O. Minimal ovarian stimulation with clomiphene citrate: a large-scale retrospective study. Reproductive biomedicine online, 2007, 15(2): 134-148.

17. Nazarenko TA. Stimulation of ovarian function. 5th Ed., added and revised. M.: Medpressinform, 2015.

18. Dmitrieva NV, et al. Experience of double stimulation of superovulation (duostim) in women with a «poor» ovarian response. Materials of the 25th International RAHR Conference «Reproductive Technologies Today and Tomorrow», September 6 - 9, 2017, St. Petersburg. P. 116-117.

19. Nikitin S.V. The experience of double ovulation stimulation vs ovulation stimulation in the antHN-RG protocols in IVF/ICSI cycles in patients with reduced ovarian reserve. Materials of the 25th International RAHR Conference «Reproductive Technologies Today and Tomorrow», September 9- 12, 2015, Sochi. C. 20.

20. Ubaldi FM, Capalbo A, Vaiarelli A, Cimadomo D, Colamaria S, Alviggi C, Trabucco E, Venturella R, Vajta G and Rienzi L. Follicular versus luteal phase ovarian stimulation during the same menstrual cycle (DuoStim) in a reduced ovarian reserve population results in a similar euploid blastocyst formation rate: new insight in ovarian reserve exploitation. Fertility and sterility, 2016, 105(6): 1488-1495.

21. Anshina MB. IVF in natural cycles (clinical lecture). Problemy Reproduktsii, 2008, 14 (3): 48-52.

22. Zdanovsky VM. The first results of IVM in Russia. Problemy Reproduktsii, 2006, 12: 17-20.

23. Smirnova AA et al. IVM in patients with a high risk of developing Ovarian HyperStimulation Syndrome. Materials of the 25th International RAHR Conference «Reproductive Technologies Today and Tomorrow», September 9- 12, 2015, Sochi. P. 221.

24. Krstich EV, Krasnopolskaya KV, Kabanova DI. New approaches to increasing the effectiveness of IVF in women of older reproductive age. Akusherstvo i Ginekologiya, 2010, 2: 48-53.

25. González-Comadran M et al. Effects of transdermal testosterone in poor responders undergoing IVF: systematic review and meta-analysis. Reproductive biomedicine online, 2012, 25(5): 450- 459.

26. Kolibianakis EM et al. Addition of growth hormone to gonadotrophins in ovarian stimulation of poor responders treated by in-vitro fertilization: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Human reproduction update, 2009, 15(6): 613-622.

27. Kolibianakis EM, Papanikolaou EG, Camus M et al. Oral contraceptive pill pretreatment on ongoing pregnancy rates in patients stimulated with GnRG antagonist and recombinant FSH for IVF. Hum Reprod, 2006, 21: 352-357.

28. Rudakova EB, Strizhova TV, Zamakhovskaya LYu, Trubnikova OB. ART in the framework of state programs. Materials of the 25th International RAHR Conference «Reproductive Technologies Today and Tomorrow», September 9- 12, 2015, Sochi. Pp. 201-2.