Is It Possible to Prevent Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome by Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Agonist Triggering and Modified Luteal Support in Patients With Polycystic Ovarian Morphology?
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist triggering plus 1,500 IU human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) supplementation protocol was previously claimed effective in reducing the ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) incidence in high responders. METHODS: This retrospective study included women with polycystic ovarian (PCO) morphology who were at high risk of OHSS and were given the GnRH agonist trigger plus hCG luteal support protocol in a single center. RESULTS: The mean peak estradiol level was 5,336 ± 2,341 (1,187 - 19,746) pg/mL. The mean number of follicles > 12 mm on the day of trigger was 22 ± 7 (9 - 51). A total of 88 cycles were undertaken. Sixty-three (71.5%) women underwent fresh embryo transfer. Fresh embryo transfer was canceled in 21 (23.8%) and embryo transfer was canceled in four (4.5%) women. The overall clinical pregnancy rate was 46.4% per started cycle. A total of 12 (13.6%) patients developed OHSS. "Freeze-all" policy did not attenuate OHSS in four patients, and three of these patients developed OHSS despite 1,500 IU hCG was not administered. CONCLUSION: We conclude that OHSS may still occur with the use of a GnRH agonist trigger combined with low-dose hCG supplementation protocol in women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) or PCO morphology. Furthermore, we also conclude that "freeze-all" policy also will not completely eliminate OHSS development in high-risk women.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".