Menotropins alone are superior to a clomiphene citrate and menotropin combination for superovulation induction among clomiphene citrate failures

Abstract

To examine the difference in efficacy between two protocols of superovulation induction with IUI among infertile couples. A prospective randomized trial. Normal human volunteers in an infertility clinic. Consecutively treated patients attending our infertility clinic for superovulation induction with IUI who had been unsuccessfully treated by clomiphene citrate (CC). Infertile couples were randomized to undergo one of two controlled ovarian hyperstimulation protocols. Group A patients received daily hMG beginning on cycle day 3, whereas group B patients were administered CC days 3 through 7, followed by hMG from day 7 onward. Randomization was performed using a random numbers table. In both groups, ovulation was triggered by 5,000 IU hCG and IUI was performed by 36 hours. Studied cycle performance parameters included peak E2, number of dominant and intermediate-sized follicles recruited, endometrial thickness and pattern, and frequency of monitoring. Data analysis demonstrated no significant difference between the two groups with respect to patient age, parity, weight, indication for superovulation and IUI, number of dominant follicles recruited, peak E2, or mean number of total motile sperm inseminated. Endometrial thickness and pattern differed between treatments, however, with group A demonstrating relatively thicker and proportionately more trilaminar patterns than group B. Group A had significantly more serum E2 measurements, as well as transvaginal sonograms performed, when compared with group B. Pregnancy rates for groups A and B were 0.192 and 0.091, respectively. Of 25 pregnancies in group A, 7 (0.28) were multiples, whereas there were no multiple gestations in group B. For patients undergoing superovulation with IUI, a menotropin-alone protocol yields significantly higher pregnancy rates than one using a combination of menotropin with CC. These differences could not be explained by patient characteristics. Among cycle performance parameters, endometrial thickness and pattern differed significantly between the two groups.