Genotoxicity and Fetal Abnormality in Streptozotocin-Induced Diabetic Rats Exposed to Cigarette Smoke Prior to and during Pregnancy

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)

Genotoxicity Evaluation in Severe or Mild Diabetic Pregnancy in Laboratory Animals

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)

Menstrual irregularity: a possible clinical marker of metabolic dysfunction in women with class III obesity

Purpose. To evaluate whether menstrual irregularity in morbidly obese women is indicative of metabolic dysfunction.Patients and Methods. Fifty-seven women with morbid obesity were evaluated. They were divided into two groups: one comprising women without menstrual dysfunctions or hirsutism (Group 1), and another obese women showing menstrual dysfunction with or without hirsutism (Group 2). The following were evaluated: age, colour, childbirth, marital status, profession, socio-economic level, education, age at menarche, body weight, height, body mass index, presence of hirsutism (Ferriman Gallwey Index), abdominal circumference, hip circumference, waist-to-hip ratio, menstrual cycle, blood pressure, presence of acanthosis nigricans, insulin resistance (IR), fasting glycaemia, total cholesterol, HDL-C, LDL-C, triglycerides, thyroid-stimulating hormone, free T4, luteinising hormone (LH), follicle-stimulating hormone, prolactin, total testosterone, dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate, insulin and the Homeostasis Model Assessment (HOMA test).Results. Clinical and epidemiological aspects did not present statistical differences. Clinical and laboratory parameters did not show statistically significant alterations; however, HOMA test values for Group 2 were significantly higher than those for Group 1.Conclusions. The presence of IR in class III obese women can cause menstrual dysfunctions such as amenorrhoea or oligomenorrhoea even in the absence of hyperandrogenism, suggesting that IR plays an important role in the ovarian mechanisms involved in the menstrual cycle control.

Single-embryo transfer reduces clinical pregnancy rates and live births in fresh IVF and Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection (ICSI) cycles: a meta-analysis

Background: It has become an accepted procedure to transfer more than one embryo to the patient to achieve acceptable ongoing pregnancy rates. However, transfers of more than a single embryo increase the probability of establishing a multiple gestation. Single-embryo transfer can minimize twin pregnancies but may also lower live birth rates. This meta-analysis aimed to compare current data on single-embryo versus double-embryo transfer in fresh IVF/ICSI cycles with respect to implantation, ongoing pregnancy and live birth rates.Methods: Search strategies included on-line surveys of databases from 1995 to 2008. Data management and analysis were conducted using the Stats Direct statistical software. The fixed-effect model was used for odds ratio (OR). Fixed-effect effectiveness was evaluated by the Mantel Haenszel method. Seven trials fulfilled the inclusion criteria.Results: When pooling results under the fixed-effect model, the implantation rate was not significantly different between double-embryo transfer (34.5%) and single-embryo transfer group (34.7%) (P = 0.96; OR = 0.99, 95% CI 0.78, 1.25). on the other hand, double-embryo transfer produced a statistically significantly higher ongoing clinical pregnancy rate (44.5%) than single-embryo transfer (28.3%) (P < 0.0001; OR: 2.06, 95% CI = 1.64,2.60). At the same time, pooling results presented a significantly higher live birth rate when double-embryo transfer (42.5%) (P < 0.001; OR: 1.87, 95% CI = 1.44,2.42) was compared with single-embryo transfer (28.4%).Conclusion: Meta-analysis with 95% confidence showed that, despite similar implantation rates, fresh double-embryo transfer had a 1.64 to 2.60 times greater ongoing pregnancy rate and 1.44 to 2.42 times greater live birth rate than single-embryo transfer in a population suitable for ART treatment.

Administration of single-dose GnRH agonist in the luteal phase in ICSI cycles: a meta-analysis

Background: The effects of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) administered in the luteal phase remains controversial. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effect of the administration of a single-dose of GnRH-a in the luteal phase on ICSI clinical outcomes.Methods: The research strategy included the online search of databases. Only randomized studies were included. The outcomes analyzed were implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) per transfer and ongoing pregnancy rate. The fixed effects model was used for odds ratio. In all trials, a single dose of GnRH-a was administered at day 5/6 after ICSI procedures.Results: All cycles presented statistically significantly higher rates of implantation (P < 0.0001), CPR per transfer (P = 0.006) and ongoing pregnancy (P = 0.02) in the group that received luteal-phase GnRH-a administration than in the control group (without luteal-phase-GnRH-a administration). When meta-analysis was carried out only in trials that had used long GnRH-a ovarian stimulation protocol, CPR per transfer (P = 0.06) and ongoing pregnancy (P = 0.23) rates were not significantly different between the groups, but implantation rate was significant higher (P = 0.02) in the group that received luteal-phase-GnRH-a administration. on the other hand, the results from trials that had used GnRH antagonist multi-dose ovarian stimulation protocol showed statistically significantly higher implantation (P = 0.0002), CPR per transfer (P = 0.04) and ongoing pregnancy rate (P = 0.04) in the luteal-phaseGnRH- a administration group. The majority of the results presented heterogeneity.Conclusions: These findings demonstrate that the luteal-phase single-dose GnRH-a administration can increase implantation rate in all cycles and CPR per transfer and ongoing pregnancy rate in cycles with GnRH antagonist ovarian stimulation protocol. Nevertheless, by considering the heterogeneity between the trials, it seems premature to recommend the use of GnRH-a in the luteal phase. Additional randomized controlled trials are necessary before evidence-based recommendations can be provided.

Effects of recombinant LH supplementation to recombinant FSH during induced ovarian stimulation in the GnRH-agonist protocol: a matched case-control study

Background: Some studies have suggested that the suppression of endogenous LH secretion does not seem to affect the majority of patients who are undergoing assisted reproduction and stimulation with recombinant FSH (r-FSH). Other studies have indicated that a group of normogonadotrophic women down-regulated and stimulated with pure FSH preparations may experience low LH concentrations that compromise the IVF parameters. The present study aimed to compare the efficacy of recombinant LH (r-LH) supplementation for controlled ovarian stimulation in r-FSH and GnRH-agonist (GnRH-a) protocol in ICSI cycles.Methods: A total of 244 patients without ovulatory dysfunction, aged < 40 years and at the first ICSI cycle were divided into two groups matched by age according to an ovarian stimulation scheme: Group I (n = 122): Down-regulation with GnRH-a + r-FSH and Group II (n = 122): Downregulation with GnRH-a + r-FSH and r-LH (beginning simultaneously).Result(s): The number of oocytes collected, the number of oocytes in metaphase II and fertilization rate were significantly lower in the Group I than in Group II (P = 0.036, P = 0.0014 and P = 0.017, respectively). In addition, the mean number of embryos produced per cycle and the mean number of frozen embryos per cycle were statistically lower (P = 0.0092 and P = 0.0008, respectively) in Group I than in Group II. Finally the cumulative implantation rate (fresh+thaw ed embryos) was significantly lower (P = 0.04) in Group I than in Group II. The other clinical and laboratory results analyzed did not show difference between groups.Conclusion: These data support r-LH supplementation in ovarian stimulation protocols with r-FSH and GnRH-a for assisted reproduction treatment.