Main Article Content
Objectives: To assess the outcome of Flare-up versus Antagonist protocol and to determine factors related to poor responders.
Methodology: this is a random control trial among 834 patients who were predicted to ovarian poor response from 2014 to 2018.
Results: The rate of biochemical pregnancy was 4.5% with Flare-up versus 8,1% with Antagonist (p<0.05). The rate of fertilization, implantation and clinical pregnancy were not significant different
between the 2 protocols. Age and number of AFC were significant factors to predict poor ovarian response. However, with Flare-up, there were 2 more factors could be used for the purpose which
was basal FSH and E2 day 7.
Conclusion: The outcome of treatment between Flare-up and Antagonist among predicted poor ovarian response was comparable. Age and AFC were valuable factors in prediction of poor ovarian
Ovarian poor response, Flare-up, Antagonist, related factors
 Hoi NX, Study on effectiveness of GnRH Agonist single mini dose in combination with recombinant FSH in ovarian stimulation in IVF, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Nanoi Medical University, 2010. (in Vietnamese)
 Hoi NX, To evaluate impact of antagonist and agonist on predictive poor response patients to ovarian stimulation, Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology, 2007; 3: 215-219. (in Vietnamese)
 Padilla SL, Dugan K, Maruschak V et al., Use of the flare-up protocol with high dose human follicle stimulating hormone and human menopausal gonadotropins for in vitro fertilization in poor responders, Fertil Steril., 1996; 65(4): 796-799.
 Akman MA, Erden HF, Tosun SB et al., Comparison of agonistic flare-up-protocol and antagonistic multiple dose protocol in ovarian stimulation of poor responders: results of a prospective randomized trial, Hum Reprod., 2001; 16(5): 868-870.
 Berin I, Stein DE, Keltz MD, A comparison of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist and GnRH agonist flare protocols for poor responders undergoing in vitro fertilization, Fertil Steril., 2010; 93(2): 360-363.
 Şahin D, Selçuk S, Devranoğlu B et al., Comparison of long GnRH agonist versus GnRH antagonist protocol in poor responders, Turkish journal of obstetrics and gynecology, 2014; 11(4): 203-206.
 Scott RT, Elkind-Hirsch KE, Styne-Gross A et al., The predictive value for in vitro fertility delivery rates is greatly impacted by the method used to select the threshold between normal and elevated basal follicle-stimulating hormone, Fertil Steril., 2008; 89(4): 868-878.
 Ibrahim ZM, Youssef HYM, Elbialy MM et al., Micro-dose flare-up gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist vs. flexible gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol in patient with poor ovarian reserve, Middle East Fertility Society Journal, 2011; 16(4): 272-277.
 Mohamed KA, Davies WA, Allsopp J et al., Agonist flare-up versus antagonist in the management of poor responders undergoing in vitro fertilization treatment, Fertil Steril., 2011; 83(2): 331-335.
 Fasouliotis SJ, Laufer N, Sabbagh-Ehrlich S et al., Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH)-antagonist versus GnRH-agonist in ovarian stimulation of poor responders undergoing IVF, J Assist Reprod Genet., 2003; 20(11): 455-460.
 Xiao J, Chang S, Chen S, The effectiveness of gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist in poor ovarian responders undergoing in vitro fertilization: a systematic review and meta-analysis, Fertil Steril., 2013; 100(6): 1594-1601.
 Zanetti BF, Braga D, Setti AS et al., Predictive factors for biochemical pregnancy in intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles, Reprod Biol., 2019; 19(1): 55-60.
 Freour T, Menez C, Allaoua D et al., Respective performance of age, AFC, AMH and FSH in poor responders identification, Fertility and Sterility, 2008; 90:104.
 Gordon K, Verweij K, Does the Antral Follicle Count (AFC) Component of the Bologna Poor Responder Criteria (AF≤7) Predict Outcome in Corifollitropin Alfa Cycles?, Fertility and Sterility, 2013; 99(3): 28.