The effect of conventional vs. mild XXXX on the total number of live babies born from a given oocyte retrieval.

@entity1 @entity43
PURPOSE: To compare pregnancy outcome in @entity1 with normal oocyte reserve according to whether they received conventional or mild follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) controlled @entity43 (COH) further stratified by age. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A ten-year retrospective study including all cycles (even multiple in given @entity1 ) was performed. Mild stimulation including all cycles initiated and continued with 150 IU FSH or less from early follicular phase. Everything else was considered conventional stimulation. Mild stimulation included natural cycles or those with just a boost of 75 IU FSH from the mid to late follicular phase. Only @entity1 with normal oocyte reserve were selected--serum FSH < 12 mIU/mL and serum E2 < 50 pg/mL. Live delivered pregnancy rates within three age groups ( <= 35, 36-39, and 40-42 years) were compared per embryo transfer and per embryo retrieval, i.e., the percentage of @entity1 having a live baby without proceeding to another IVF-ET cycle. Also compared were the average number of babies born from one retrieval. RESULTS: For aged  <= 35 there were no differences in pregnancy rates per transfer but a trend for higher pregnancy rates per retrieval with conventional stimulation. For all other age groups both pregnancy rates per transfer and retrieval were significantly higher with conventional stimulation. This was reflected with a higher average number of babies born per retrieval with conventional. CONCLUSIONS: For @entity1 with normal oocyte reserve in general, there is no advantage of mild vs. conventional COH other than cost saving. Of course there are exceptions, e.g., @entity43 with conventional COH.
