UNASSIGNED: The occurrence of ovarian hematoma during controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) is very rare. Until now, there is no such case reported in the literature. In this study, an attempt was made to discuss the possible mechanisms for the development of hematoma in such patients, the clinical presentation, monitoring, and management of these cases.
UNASSIGNED: A rare case of periovarian hematoma was reported in a patient with a history of endometriosis undergoing ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization. On the seventh day of stimulation, the patient complained of severe pain in the abdomen. Her vitals and blood investigations were within normal limits. On abdominal examination, mild tenderness was noted in the left iliac fossa. On vaginal examination, fullness and tenderness were noted in the left fornix. On ultrasound, probe tenderness was present and a left ovarian hematoma measuring 2.0×1.81×1.55 cm was observed. She was managed conservatively. The hematoma exhibited a gradual reduction following the pick-up procedure and eventually resolved completely within a month.
UNASSIGNED: Underlying endometriosis could be one of the possible causes of this periovarian hematoma. A conservative approach with close monitoring forms the first-line management in hemodynamically stable patients.

Since the advent of assisted reproductive technology, different variables have been shown to affect pregnancy outcomes. One of the most prevalent studied events is the premature rise in serum progesterone concentrations on the day of trigger administration during cycles of ovarian stimulation. This phenomenon, classically known as premature luteinization, has been observed significantly for decades and has been linked to adverse pregnancy outcomes and lower live birth rates. Ultimately, a quest to find a precise serum progesterone concentration cut-off value that can be effectively used to predict pregnancy outcomes prior to trigger administration is still underway. The purpose of the current research was to study the available literature on the relationship between serum progesterone on the day of trigger administration in controlled ovarian stimulation cycles used for IVF in an attempt to identify a cut-off serum progesterone concentration that can be used to effectively predict future pregnancy outcomes in fresh transfers. This study is a review of the literature and is based on information and data gathered from 36 published articles. The majority of the literature shows that a serum progesterone concentration cut-off of 1.5 ng/ml (4.77 nmol/L) can be used prior to trigger administration to effectively predict pregnancy outcomes. Premature progesterone elevation on the day or prior to the trigger administration is associated with adverse pregnancy outcomes in IVF cycles. Other factors such as follicle number, serum concentration of other hormones, and ovarian response to ovarian stimulation should also be considered to predict the success of IVF protocols.

Planned oocyte cryopreservation (OC) has the potential to address the burden of the biological clock, giving women and individuals with ovaries more autonomy in choosing when to have children and with whom. In the United States, the annual number of OC cycles has grown significantly, yet many questions remain regarding planned OC. The field is starting to gather data on the clinical practice and social perspectives around planned oocyte cryopreservation, including the optimal age range at which to offer planned OC, what factors are most predictive of a successful outcome, and the optimal number of oocytes and ovarian stimulation cycles to achieve a live birth. There is a clear need for setting realistic expectations about the chance of success with OC; however, most patients have yet to return to thaw their oocytes, and outcomes data are limited. Clinical models have been developed to predict OC success based on surrogate markers such as age, number of oocytes retrieved, and anti-Müllerian hormone level. Patient education should emphasize the age-related decline in fertility, that eggs do not equal embryos, and that more than one cycle may be needed to obtain sufficient oocytes to have a reasonable chance of future success. While planned OC is not quite an insurance policy against future reproductive challenges, it provides the best option to date for expanding the reproductive window and maximizing reproductive options while navigating individual life circumstances in the context of family building.

Endometriosis is a benign chronic disease with a major impact on a woman\'s quality of life, mainly due to painful physical symptoms. Endometriosis is also a common cause of infertility caused by low ovarian reserve, distorted pelvic anatomy, and severe local inflammation with a direct negative impact on the quality of oocytes, embryos, and endometrium. We conducted a retrospective study between January 2019 and December 2023, including women with a history of surgery for endometriosis who underwent in vitro fertilization (IVF) to achieve pregnancy. Their reproductive outcome was compared with a group of patients with documented tubal obstruction. The aim of our study was to identify the factors associated with a positive impact on the pregnancy rate, specifically age, anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH), ovarian stimulation protocol, and types of gonadotropins used. We analyzed a group of 175 patients with endometriosis compared with 189 patients with tubal obstruction. The average age was similar between the two groups but with a difference in the average AMH value (1.63 ± 1.09 ng/mL vs. 2.55 ± 1.67 ng/mL). The most utilized ovarian stimulation protocol in both groups was the short gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist. The clinical pregnancy rate was 27.2% in the endometriosis group and 54.7% in the tubal obstruction group. Our study revealed that treatment with corifollitropin alfa in the endometriosis group was associated with a higher clinical pregnancy rate. AMH and age proved to be significant independent factors for the reproductive outcome.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) treatment in comparison to those of gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists for the prevention of premature luteinizing hormone surges during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (OS) and the impact of these effects on developing embryos and pregnancy outcomes. Data from 757 cycles of GnRH antagonist treatment and 756 cycles of MPA treatment were evaluated at the Akdeniz University Faculty of Medicine Assisted Reproductive Treatment Center between October 2018 and April 2022. Patient records were obtained from the electronic database of the centre and analysed. In our centre, GnRH antagonist protocols were used between 2018 and 2020, and MPA protocols were used between 2020 and 2022. We chose our study population by year. Our study is a comparative retrospective study. All methods in this study were performed in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations. Patients using MPA were significantly older (33.9 ± 5.6 vs. 32.6 ± 5.6, p < 0.001) and had a lower number of antral follicles (AFC) (10.7 ± 8.6 vs. 11.9 ± 10.8, p = 0.007) than those using GnRH antagonists. Both MPA (2.9%) and GnRH antagonists (2.2%) had similar effectiveness in preventing premature ovulation (p = 0.415). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of the number of total developed embryos (1.3 ± 1.3 vs. 1.2 ± 1.2, p = 0.765). There was no significant difference in the clinical pregnancy rates with the first ET (%35.4 vs. %30.1, p = 0.074), per total number of transfers (35.3% vs. 30.1%, p = 0.077). MPA was found to be effective at preventing premature ovulation during OS treatment, and the incidence of developing embryo and pregnancy outcomes in patients using MPA were similar to those in patients using GnRH antagonists. Therefore, the use of MPA instead of GnRH antagonists during OS may be a viable alternative for patients not scheduled for fresh ET.

OBJECTIVE: Do the various forms of hormonal and non-hormonal contraceptives have any association with ovarian stimulation outcomes, such as oocyte yield and maturation, in patients undergoing planned oocyte cryopreservation (POC)?
METHODS: This retrospective cohort study included all patients who underwent POC cycles between 2011 and 2023. The use of types of contraception before a POC cycle was recorded. The study evaluated the median number of cumulus-oocyte complexes obtained after vaginal oocyte retrieval and the proportion of metaphase II oocytes that underwent vitrification among all the cohorts.
RESULTS: A total of 4059 oocyte freezing cycles were included in the analysis. Eight types of contraceptive method were recognized in patients undergoing ovarian stimulation: intrauterine device (IUD), copper (n = 84); IUD, levonorgestrel low dose (<52 mg) (n = 37); IUD, levonorgestrel (n = 192); subdermal etonogestrel implant (n = 14); injectable medroxyprogesterone acetate (n = 11); etonogestrel vaginal ring (n = 142); combined oral contraceptive pills (n = 2349); and norelgestromin transdermal patch (n = 10). The control group included patients not using contraceptives or using barrier or calendar methods (n = 1220). Among all the cohorts the median number of cumulus-oocyte complexes retrieved during oocyte retrieval was comparable (P = 0.054), and a significant difference in oocyte maturity rate with median number of vitrified oocytes was found (P = 0.03, P < 0.001, respectively). After adjusting for confounders a multivariate analysis found no association between the type of contraceptive and proportion of metaphase II oocytes available for cryopreservation.
CONCLUSIONS: Among the various forms of contraception, none was shown to have an adverse association with oocyte yield or maturation rate in patients undergoing POC.

UNASSIGNED: To explore the use of weekly continuous dosing of corifollitropin α in DuoStim cycles.
UNASSIGNED: Pilot-matched case-control study.
UNASSIGNED: Private fertility center.
UNASSIGNED: Cases were defined as DuoStim cycles performed from November 2022 to May 2023 receiving weekly continuous dosing of corifollitropin α (n = 15). Controls were chosen from a database comprising DuoStim cycles conducted at our institution during the years 2021/2022. Matching was done on a 1-to-1 basis, based on antimüllerian hormone values (±0.4 pmol/L) and age (n = 15).
UNASSIGNED: Injections of corifollitropin α once every 8 days, along with uninterrupted oral administration of micronized progesterone 200 mg/d (for luteinizing hormone surge prevention) throughout the follicular and luteal phases for ovarian stimulation. Oocyte retrieval.
UNASSIGNED: Total number of cumulus-oocyte complexes and metaphase II oocytes obtained in follicular + luteal phase stimulation. Secondary outcomes evaluated fertilization rates, number of blastocysts, days of stimulation, number of injectables required, and gonadotropin cost.
UNASSIGNED: The study group achieved similar total oocyte and MII yield vs. daily follicle-stimulating hormone protocol (13.3 ± 6.9 vs. 11.8 ± 6.1 and 10.4 ± 6.3 vs. 9.2 ± 4.6, respectively). All secondary outcomes showed no significant differences. The study group experienced a significant reduction of injections to complete a DuoStim cycle (4.5 ± 1.4 vs. 35.2 ± 12.2; mean deviation -30.7; 95% confidence interval, -37.5- to -23.9)].
UNASSIGNED: Corifollitropin α on a weekly basis throughout a DuoStim cycle yields an equivalent number of oocytes as standard daily follicle-stimulating hormone administration while drastically reducing the number of required injections.
UNASSIGNED: NCT05815719. EudraCT: 2022-003177-32.

UNASSIGNED: To determine whether endometrial thickness (EMT) differs between i) clomiphene citrate (CC) and gonadotropin (Gn) utilizing patients as their own controls, and ii) patients who conceived with CC and those who did not. Furthermore, to investigate the association between late-follicular EMT and pregnancy outcomes, in CC and Gn cycles.
UNASSIGNED: Retrospective study. Three sets of analyses were conducted separately for the purpose of this study. In analysis 1, we included all cycles from women who initially underwent CC/IUI (CC1, n=1252), followed by Gn/IUI (Gn1, n=1307), to compare EMT differences between CC/IUI and Gn/IUI, utilizing women as their own controls. In analysis 2, we included all CC/IUI cycles (CC2, n=686) from women who eventually conceived with CC during the same study period, to evaluate EMT differences between patients who conceived with CC (CC2) and those who did not (CC1). In analysis 3, pregnancy outcomes among different EMT quartiles were evaluated in CC/IUI and Gn/IUI cycles, separately, to investigate the potential association between EMT and pregnancy outcomes.
UNASSIGNED: In analysis 1, when CC1 was compared to Gn1 cycles, EMT was noted to be significantly thinner [Median (IQR): 6.8 (5.5-8.0) vs. 8.3 (7.0-10.0) mm, p<0.001]. Within-patient, CC1 compared to Gn1 EMT was on average 1.7mm thinner. Generalized linear mixed models, adjusted for confounders, revealed similar results (coefficient: 1.69, 95% CI: 1.52-1.85, CC1 as ref.). In analysis 2, CC1 was compared to CC2 EMT, the former being thinner both before [Median (IQR): 6.8 (5.5-8.0) vs. 7.2 (6.0-8.9) mm, p<0.001] and after adjustment (coefficient: 0.59, 95%CI: 0.34-0.85, CC1 as ref.). In analysis 3, clinical pregnancy rates (CPRs) and ongoing pregnancy rates (OPRs) improved as EMT quartiles increased (Q1 to Q4) among CC cycles (p<0.001, p<0.001, respectively), while no such trend was observed among Gn cycles (p=0.94, p=0.68, respectively). Generalized estimating equations models, adjusted for confounders, suggested that EMT was positively associated with CPR and OPR in CC cycles, but not in Gn cycles.
UNASSIGNED: Within-patient, CC generally resulted in thinner EMT compared to Gn. Thinner endometrium was associated with decreased OPR in CC cycles, while no such association was detected in Gn cycles.

BACKGROUND: In the realm of in vitro fertilization (IVF), artificial intelligence (AI) models serve as invaluable tools for clinicians, offering predictive insights into ovarian stimulation outcomes. Predicting and understanding a patient\'s response to ovarian stimulation can help in personalizing doses of drugs, preventing adverse outcomes (eg, hyperstimulation), and improving the likelihood of successful fertilization and pregnancy. Given the pivotal role of accurate predictions in IVF procedures, it becomes important to investigate the landscape of AI models that are being used to predict the outcomes of ovarian stimulation.
OBJECTIVE: The objective of this review is to comprehensively examine the literature to explore the characteristics of AI models used for predicting ovarian stimulation outcomes in the context of IVF.
METHODS: A total of 6 electronic databases were searched for peer-reviewed literature published before August 2023, using the concepts of IVF and AI, along with their related terms. Records were independently screened by 2 reviewers against the eligibility criteria. The extracted data were then consolidated and presented through narrative synthesis.
RESULTS: Upon reviewing 1348 articles, 30 met the predetermined inclusion criteria. The literature primarily focused on the number of oocytes retrieved as the main predicted outcome. Microscopy images stood out as the primary ground truth reference. The reviewed studies also highlighted that the most frequently adopted stimulation protocol was the gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist. In terms of using trigger medication, human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) was the most commonly selected option. Among the machine learning techniques, the favored choice was the support vector machine. As for the validation of AI algorithms, the hold-out cross-validation method was the most prevalent. The area under the curve was highlighted as the primary evaluation metric. The literature exhibited a wide variation in the number of features used for AI algorithm development, ranging from 2 to 28,054 features. Data were mostly sourced from patient demographics, followed by laboratory data, specifically hormonal levels. Notably, the vast majority of studies were restricted to a single infertility clinic and exclusively relied on nonpublic data sets.
CONCLUSIONS: These insights highlight an urgent need to diversify data sources and explore varied AI techniques for improved prediction accuracy and generalizability of AI models for the prediction of ovarian stimulation outcomes. Future research should prioritize multiclinic collaborations and consider leveraging public data sets, aiming for more precise AI-driven predictions that ultimately boost patient care and IVF success rates.

OBJECTIVE: Is fertility affected in women with multiple sclerosis (MS), and what is their usage of assisted reproductive technology (ART)?
METHODS: Data regarding multiple sclerosis and ART usage among patients with multiple sclerosis were extracted from the Israeli health maintenance organization Clalit Health Service database. Data regarding the diagnosis and treatment of multiple sclerosis, cause of infertility and use of fertility treatments were collected for all female multiple sclerosis patients aged 18-45 years between 2005 and 2021. Each patient was matched by age in a 1:10 ratio with reference women from the general population. The prevalence of infertility was compared between the two groups. Univariate and multivariate statistical tests were used to analyse the association between multiple sclerosis and fertility treatments including IVF and ovarian stimulation.
RESULTS: During the study period, 1309 multiple sclerosis patients were compared with 13,090 controls from the general population matched for age. The mean age was 29 ± 7.8 years. The overall prevalence of infertility was 15.4% (202/1309) among the multiple sclerosis patients, similar to the general population (16.3%; 2129/13090) (P = 0.436). The prevalence of IVF and ovarian stimulation was similar among multiple sclerosis patients and matched controls from the general population (8.1% versus 7.2%, P = 0.240; 13.8% versus 14.3%; P = 0.624, respectively).
CONCLUSIONS: The results show similar rates of infertility and fertility treatments among multiple sclerosis patients and the general population. This provides reassurance that fertility among women with multiple sclerosis does not differ from that of women in the general population, and indicates there is no excessive usage of ART.