TY - JOUR
T1 - Urinary versus recombinant gonadotropins for ovarian stimulation in women undergoing treatment with assisted reproductive technology
AU - Patki, Ameet
AU - Bavishi, Himanshu
AU - Kumari, Chandravati
AU - Kamraj, Jayarani
AU - Venugopal, M.
AU - Kunjimoideen, K.
AU - Nadkarni, Poornima
AU - Sankari, Samundi
AU - Chaudhary, Sunil
AU - Sangeeta, M.
AU - Manjunath, C.
AU - Kumar, Pratap
PY - 2018/4/1
Y1 - 2018/4/1
N2 - Globally, about 10%-15% couples are affected by infertility, with major role being played by the couple's lifestyle. Several gonadotropin preparations (urinary, purified urinary, recombinant, and biosimilars) are available for use. Purified urinary formulations offer numerous advantages over their predecessor, including lesser injection dose required, ability to be administered subcutaneously, less batch-to-batch variability, better efficacy, ability to individualize protocols as per patient's need, better control of developing follicles, less risk of multiple pregnancies, and hyperstimulation. Published results of Cochrane reviews and meta-analysis show no difference in efficacy or safety between urinary and recombinant gonadotropins. In the absence of any significant difference, cost plays an important role in deciding choice of gonadotropins. In this article, we have reviewed the results of comparative clinical trials, Cochrane analysis, and meta-analysis to derive consensus statements regarding efficacy, safety, and cost implications of urinary versus recombinant gonadotropin preparations.
AB - Globally, about 10%-15% couples are affected by infertility, with major role being played by the couple's lifestyle. Several gonadotropin preparations (urinary, purified urinary, recombinant, and biosimilars) are available for use. Purified urinary formulations offer numerous advantages over their predecessor, including lesser injection dose required, ability to be administered subcutaneously, less batch-to-batch variability, better efficacy, ability to individualize protocols as per patient's need, better control of developing follicles, less risk of multiple pregnancies, and hyperstimulation. Published results of Cochrane reviews and meta-analysis show no difference in efficacy or safety between urinary and recombinant gonadotropins. In the absence of any significant difference, cost plays an important role in deciding choice of gonadotropins. In this article, we have reviewed the results of comparative clinical trials, Cochrane analysis, and meta-analysis to derive consensus statements regarding efficacy, safety, and cost implications of urinary versus recombinant gonadotropin preparations.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85051350576&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85051350576&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.4103/jhrs.JHRS_79_17
DO - 10.4103/jhrs.JHRS_79_17
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:85051350576
SN - 0974-1208
VL - 11
SP - 119
EP - 124
JO - Journal of Human Reproductive Sciences
JF - Journal of Human Reproductive Sciences
IS - 2
ER -