PubMed · 5819974
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
J Zander. 1969. [Medicinal ovulation induction].. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00683093
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this literature search is to establish if metformin is efficacious when given to clomiphene citrate (CC)-resistant polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) patients. DESIGN: Medline database was searched from 1 January 1980 to 1 January 2005. Inclusion criteria were prospective randomized control trials where metformin was randomized either with placebo or CC to induce ovulation in the CC-resistant patient. RESULT(S): Group 1: Four trials were prospective double-blind placebo controlled. When the data of the four trials were pooled, the overall effect of the addition of metformin in the CC patient was P=.0006 with a 95% confidence interval (CI) of odds ratio (OR) 1.81-8.84. Group 2: In two trials the randomization was only prospective. When the data of these two trials were pooled, the overall effect of the addition of metformin in the CC-resistant patient was P<.0001 with a 95% CI of OR 6.24-70.27. Groups 1 and 2: The combined data show an overall effect of P<.0001 with a 95% CI of OR 3.59-12.96. CONCLUSION(S): The addition of metformin in the CC-resistant patient is highly effective in achieving ovulation induction.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
OBJECTIVE: This study was designed to compare the exogenous FSH ovarian reserve test (EFORT) versus the clomiphene citrate challenge test (CCCT), basal FSH, and basal inhibin B, with respect to their ability to predict poor and/or hyperresponders in an IVF population. DESIGN: Prospective randomized controlled trial. SETTING: Fertility center of a university hospital. PATIENT(S): One hundred ten patients undergoing their first IVF cycle, randomized into two groups. INTERVENTION(S): Fifty-six patients underwent a CCCT, and 54 patients underwent an EFORT. In all patients, the test was followed by an IVF treatment. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Ovarian response, expressed by the total number of retrieved oocytes. RESULT(S): Univariate logistic regression showed that the best predictor for poor response is the CCCT (area under receiver operator characteristic curve [ROC-AUC] = 0.87), with maximal accuracy of 0.89. Multiple logistic regression analysis did not produce a better model in terms of improving the prediction of poor response. For hyper response, univariate logistic regression showed that the best predictor is the inhibin B increment in the EFORT (ROC-AUC = 0.92) but with a low maximal accuracy of 0.78. Again, multiple logistic regression analysis did not produce a better model in terms of predicting hyper response. CONCLUSION(S): Our study, the first which compares the CCCT with the EFORT for the prediction of poor and hyperresponders, shows that the CCCT is superior for identification of low responders. The EFORT (inhibin B increment) is superior for prediction of hyper response at the cost of a high rate of false positives. Neither of the two tests seems adequate to act alone for identification of both poor and hyperresponders.