Abstract

Superovulation procedures and assisted reproductive technologies have been widely used to treat couples who have infertility problems. Although generally safe, the superovulation procedures are associated with a series of complications, such as ovarian hyper-stimulation syndrome, thromboembolism, and adnexal torsion. The role of long-term repeated superovulation in ovarian aging and especially in associated disorders such as osteoporosis and cardiovascular diseases is still unclear. In this study, we sought to determine if repeated superovulation by ten cycles of treatment with pregnant mare serum gonadotropin/human chorionic gonadotropin could affect ovarian reserve, ovarian function, bone density and heart function. Ovarian reserve and function were reflected by the size of the primordial follicle pool, anti-Mullerian hormone expressions, hormone levels and fertility status. Furthermore, we examined bone density and heart function by microCT and cardiovascular ultrasonography, respectively. After repeated superovulation, the size of the primordial follicle pool and the expression of anti-mullerian hormone decreased, along with the concentrations of estrogen and progesterone. Mice exposed to repeated superovulation showed an obvious decrease in fertility and fecundity. Furthermore, both bone density and heart ejection fraction significantly decreased. These results suggest that repeated superovulation may increase the risk of osteoporosis and cardiovascular diseases by accelerating ovarian aging.

Highlights

  • This article has been corrected: The authors have submitted the wrong composite Figure 6 (D) which had employed SEM photographs of other group mice unintentionally

  • Correction: Repeated superovulation increases the risk of osteoporosis and cardiovascular diseases by accelerating ovarian aging in mice

  • The authors declare that this correction does not change the results or conclusions of this paper

Read more

Summary

Introduction

This article has been corrected: The authors have submitted the wrong composite Figure 6 (D) which had employed SEM photographs of other group mice unintentionally.

Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call