Ultrasonic predictors of good ovarian response in infertile poly cystic ovarian disease patients

Mostafa A. Elsayed

doi:10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20232712

Authors

Mostafa A. Elsayed Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Benha Faculty Of medicine, Benha, Egypt https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7506-0572

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20232712

Keywords:

PCO, Pregnancy rate, Ultrasonic markers

Abstract

Background: Polycystic ovaries is a common endocrinal ovulatory dysfunction; the presented work presented a ultrasonographic predictor markers with scoring system to predict pregnancy rate in PCO.

Methods: The presented work is controlled trial comparing two different sets of uterine and ovarian ultrasound markers, done at Zinat Alhyat hospital in Benha Egypt. 100 participants divided into two groups induced for ovulation with minimal stimulation protocol in both, 6 different ultrasonic parameter calculated after induction of ovulation in known PCO patients, Group one with collective ultrasound score more than 6,Group two with ultrasound marker score of less than 6.

Results: Regarding the chemical pregnancy when HCG become more than 25 there were 40 out of 50 chemically pregnant in comparison to 25 out of 50 in the second arm with score less than 6 and a p value of 0.001 and a statistically significant difference ,Regarding the clinical pregnancy rate there were 35 cases with proved gestational sacs by ultrasound out of 50 in group one with score more than 6 compared to 18 cases out of 50 in the second group and p value of 0.0007 which was a high significant difference. Regarding miscarriage rate there were one 1 cases out of 35 in group one compared to 5 aborted cases out of 18 in group 2 with p value of 0.006.

Conclusions: Certain ultrasonic parameters 3 ovarian and 3 uterine can be highly correlated with ovulation and pregnancy rates in infertile PCO patients.

Metrics

Metrics Loading ...

References

Bozdag G, Mumusoglu S, Zengin D, Karabulut E, Yildiz BO. The prevalence and phenotypic features of polycystic ovary syndrome: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod. 2016;31(12):2841-55.

Goodarzi MO, Dumesic DA, Chazenbalk G, Azziz R. Polycystic ovary syndrome: etiology, pathogenesis and diagnosis. Nat Rev Endocrinol. 2011;7(4):219-31.

Azziz R, Woods KS, Reyna R, Key TJ, Knochenhauer ES, Yildiz BO. The prevalence and features of the polycystic ovary syndrome in an unselected population. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2004;89(6):2745-9.

Teede HJ, Misso ML, Costello MF, Dokras A, Laven J, Moran L, et al. International PCOS Network. Recommendations from the international evidence-based guideline for the assessment and management of polycystic ovary syndrome. Fertil Steril. 2018;110:364-79.

Sanchez-Garrido MA, Tena-Sempere M. Metabolic dysfunction in polycystic ovary syndrome: Pathogenic role of androgen excess and potential therapeutic strategies. Mol Metab. 2020;35:100937.

Sha T, Wang X, Cheng W, Yan Y. A meta-analysis of pregnancy-related outcomes and complications in women with polycystic ovary syndrome undergoing IVF. Reprod Biomed Online. 2019;39(2):281-93.

Legro RS, Arslanian SA, Ehrmann DA, Hoeger KM, Murad MH, Pasquali R, et al. Endocrine Society. Diagnosis and treatment of polycystic ovary syndrome: an Endocrine Society clinical practice guideline. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2013;98(12):4565-92.

Al Khalifah RA, Florez ID, Zoratti MJ, Dennis B, Thabane L, Bassilious E. Efficacy of treatments for polycystic ovarian syndrome management in adolescents. J Endocr Soc. 2021;5:bvaa155.

Gyliene A, Straksyte V, Zaboriene I. Value of ultrasonography parameters in diagnosing polycystic ovary syndrome. Open Med (Wars). 2022;17(1):1114-22.

Rotterdam ESHRE/ASRM-Sponsored PCOS Consensus Workshop Group. Revised 2003 consensus on diagnostic criteria and long-term health risks related to polycystic ovary syndrome. Fertil Steril. 2004;81(1):19-25.

Dogan O, Yildiz A, Temizkan O, Pulatoglu C. Comparison of uterine, endometrial and ovarian blood flow by transvaginal color Doppler ultrasound in ovulatory and anovulatory cycles. Ginekol Pol. 2016;87(8):581-4.

Younesi L, Lima ZS, Sene AA, Jebelli H, Amjad G. Comparison of uterine and ovarian stromal blood flow in patients with polycystic ovarian syndrome Europian Soc Endocr. 2019;8(1):50-56.

Gad Al-Rab MT, Mohammed AF, Hassan MM, Razek MA. Three-dimensional power Doppler indices of ovarian stromal blood flow and serum vascular endothelial growth factor after laparoscopic ovarian drilling in women with polycystic ovary syndrome. Middle East Fertil Soc J. 2015;20(3):138-43.

Sahu A, Tripathy P, Mohanty J, Nagy A. Doppler analysis of ovarian stromal blood flow changes after treatment with metformin versus ethinyl estradiol-cyproterone acetate in women with polycystic ovarian syndrome: A randomized controlled trial. J Gynecol Obstet Hum Reprod. 2019;48(5):335-9.

Battaglia C, Genazzani AD, Artini PG, Salvatori M, Giulini S, Volpe A. Ultrasonographic and color Doppler analysis in the treatment of polycystic ovary syndrome. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 1998;12(3):180-7.

Lakhani K, Seifalian AM, Atiomo WU. Polycystic ovaries. British J Radiol. 2002;75(889):9-16.

Khan MS, Shaikh A, Ratnani R. Ultrasonography and Doppler study to predict uterine receptivity in infertile patients undergoing embryo transfer. J Obstet Gynecol India. 2016;66(Suppl 1):377-82.