Urinary versus recombinant gonadotropins for ovarian stimulation in women undergoing treatment with assisted reproductive technology

Ameet Patki, Himanshu Bavishi, Chandravati Kumari, Jayarani Kamraj, M. Venugopal, K. Kunjimoideen, Poornima Nadkarni, Samundi Sankari, Sunil Chaudhary, M. Sangeeta, C. Manjunath, Pratap Kumar

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

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.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)119-124
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Human Reproductive Sciences
Volume11
Issue number2
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 01-04-2018

    Fingerprint

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • Reproductive Medicine

Cite this