ArticleFrontiers in endocrinology2025
The management of slow ovarian response in PCOS patients and its impact on clinical pregnancy outcomes.
Article in Frontiers in endocrinology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The objective of this study was to assess the trade-off between cycle continuation and cancellation in slow ovarian response (SOR) patients, and to evaluate the impact of SOR on embryo developmental potential and clinical pregnancy outcomes. Methods: A retrospective analysis was performed on 482 patients with PCOS. Patients were stratified into the SOR group (n = 113) and control group (n = 343) in accordance with follicular growth dynamics. Furthermore, data derived from the cycle cancellation group due to SOR (C-SOR group, n = 18) were incorporated for comparative assessment. Clinical outcomes among the respective groups were subsequently subjected to comparative analysis. Results: The average follicular growth rate in the control group was (1.41 ± 0.45) mm/day, which was significantly higher than that in both the SOR group (1.09 ± 0.55 mm/day, P < 0.05) and the C-SOR group (0.25 ± 0.24 mm/day, P < 0.05). Both SOR and C-SOR groups required significantly more days of Gn and a higher total Gn dose. Notably, supplementation with hCG showed potential for improving ovarian response in patients with SOR. However, if the subsequent follicular growth rate remained below 1.0 mm per day, cycle cancellation was recommended. Although oocytes retrieved was significantly lower in the SOR group than in controls, no intergroup differences were observed in normal fertilization rate, transferable embryo rate, and high-quality embryo rate. Similarly, clinical pregnancy rates after fresh or frozen embryo transfer did not differ between SOR and control groups. However, the SOR group exhibited significantly lower cumulative clinical pregnancy rates (75.22% Conclusions: Assessment of follicular growth rate in patients with SOR may facilitate clinical decision-making regarding continuation of ovarian stimulation or cycle cancellation. PCOS patients with SOR may benefit from hCG supplementation to enhance ovarian reactivity, thereby facilitating cycle completion and promoting the chance of clinical pregnancy.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.