Oocyte and embryo quality after coasting: the experience from oocyte donation

V. Isaza1, J.A. García-Velasco1,4, M. Aragonés1, J. Remohí2,3, C. Simón2,3 and A. Pellicer2,3

1 IVI-Madrid, Madrid, 2 Instituto Valenciano de Infertilidad (IVI) and 3 Department of Paediatricis, Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Valencia University of Medicine, Valencia, Spain


    Abstract
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
BACKGROUND: Oocyte donation provides us with an opportunity to study the clinical outcome of oocytes, retrieved from women undergoing coasting, in recipients in whom endometrial receptivity is unaltered by the coasting procedure. Thus, our aim was to describe oocyte donation outcome in donors undergoing coasting, the oocyte and embryo quality obtained from these cycles, and to determine the influence of coasting duration in the cycle outcome. METHODS: Matched-paired analysis included 15 oocyte donors with high response to ovarian stimulation and submitted to coasting and 15 oocyte donors with normal response to ovarian stimulation and not undergoing coasting. There were 38 oocyte recipients who shared oocytes from the donors under coasting and 37 from donors not undergoing coasting. RESULTS: Both groups of donors were comparable in terms of days and dose of ovarian stimulation, oocytes retrieved, metaphase II oocytes obtained, and in the appearance of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. Both groups of oocyte recipients were comparable in male-associated factor, pregnancy and implantation rates, as well as in embryo quality. Recipients from donors with coasting for >4 days had significantly lower implantation and pregnancy rates. CONCLUSIONS: the outcome of oocyte donation from donors undergoing coasting is not impaired, as good implantation and pregnancy rates are achieved. Embryo quality, according to our current standards, does not seem to be compromised by coasting itself. However, if coasting in oocyte donors is prolonged for >4 days there is a significant decrease in both implantation and pregnancy rates.

Key words: coasting/oocyte donation/oocyte quality/ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome


    Introduction
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) is one of the major complications from ovarian stimulation (Fluker et al., 1999Go). This syndrome is a serious and potentially life-threatening condition, which occurs in its severe form in 0.5–2% of patients undergoing ovarian stimulation (Whelan and Vlahos, 2000Go). Since the pathophysiology of this condition has not been clearly elucidated, its prevention is paramount (Egbase et al., 1999Go; Whelan and Vlahos, 2000Go).

Several risk factors have been described: young age, polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS), low body mass index (BMI), rapidly increasing and/or high serum estradiol (E2) level after ovarian stimulation, large number of follicles after ovarian stimulation and a large number of oocytes recovered after ovarian puncture (Whelan and Vlahos, 2000Go). None of them is completely reliable in predicting OHSS (Fluker et al., 1999Go). Thus, several strategies have been developed for the prevention of this condition. Since there is no single strategy that totally avoids the possibility that the syndrome may still appear, most agree that cycle cancellation is the safer choice (Whelan and Vlahos, 2000Go). Withholding gonadotrophins (‘coasting’) has been described as an effective way of avoiding cycle cancellation, while decreasing the risk of severe OHSS (Sher et al., 1995Go; Benadiva et al., 1997Go; Lee et al., 1998Go; Tortoriello et al., 1998Go; Fluker et al., 1999Go; Waldenstrom et al., 1999Go; Al-Shawaf et al., 2001Go).

When dealing with volunteer oocyte donors, who altruistically are willing to donate their oocytes, extreme measures must be taken to avoid OHSS. Oocyte donors are young women (Remohi et al., 1997Go), which means that their ovaries are larger and highly responsive to ovarian stimulation (Whelan and Vlahos, 2000Go). Most of them are also lean (low BMI) and some may even have polycystic ovaries (PCO). So it is not uncommon to find oocyte donors with a high response to ovarian stimulation and a very high risk of developing OHSS. However, some authors consider that oocyte donors have a low risk of OHSS as they do not undergo embryo transfer, avoiding pregnancy and the second wave of HCG originated by trophoblast invasion (Sauer et al., 1996Go; Sauer, 2001Go). Nevertheless, OHSS may occur, and cycle cancellation seems to be the safer choice.

Similar pregnancy rates have been described in women undergoing coasting compared with women who did not, although not all authors agree. Pregnancy rate seems to be directly related to the duration of coasting (Al-Shawaf et al., 2001Go). Oocyte quality and/or the endometrial receptivity could be impaired during prolonged coasting (Waldenstrom et al., 1999Go) although to the best of our knowledge this issue has not yet been addressed. The oocyte donation model provides the ideal clinical setting to study the outcome of oocytes from women undergoing coasting in recipients in whom the endometrial receptivity is not altered by the coasting procedure.

Thus, our main objectives were to describe: (i) oocyte donation cycle outcome in donors undergoing coasting; (ii) oocyte and embryo quality obtained from these cycles; and (iii) to determine the influence of coasting duration in cycle outcome.


    Materials and methods
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Study design
Matched-paired analysis included a total of 15 oocyte donors with high response to ovarian stimulation undergoing coasting and 15 oocyte donors without high response to ovarian stimulation and not having coasting, between November 1999 and March 2001. Donors with a high response represented 3.8% of all our oocyte donors undergoing ovarian stimulation during this time period. All donors with high response to ovarian stimulation were given the choice of cycle cancellation or coasting. They were thoroughly informed about the coasting procedure and the fact that it does not abolish completely the risk of developing OHSS. All 15 donors agreed to be included in the study, which was approved by our scientific board. Donors undergoing coasting were 24.6 ± 1.2 years old (mean ± SEM). Donors not submitted to coasting were 24.2 ± 1.1 years old. Fifteen oocyte donors with a normal response, whose ovarian puncture was performed just before a donor undergoing coasting, were used as controls. Manual verification of all medical charts was made, allowing confirmation that neither of the controls had undergone coasting. To control for potential selection factors, we matched key parameters that might have played a role, including BMI within 2 kg/m2 and age within 2 years.

Oocyte donors
All our donors volunteered altruistically, after being thoroughly informed, to donate their oocytes and fulfilled the criteria to be admitted in our oocyte donation programme, according to the current Spanish law for assisted reproduction (Peinado and Russell, 1990Go).

They all underwent a long protocol of down-regulation with a GnRH agonist (Decapeptyl®, 0.1 mg; Ipsen Pharma, Barcelona, Spain). A basal vaginal ultrasound was performed to ascertain ovarian quiescence on the first 3 days of menses, and then ovarian stimulation was started as previously described (Remohi et al., 1997Go). Briefly, they received recombinant FSH (Gonal-F®; Serono, Madrid, Spain) 300 UI/day for the first 3 days and then 150 IU/day, with individual dose adjustments as required, until more than six follicles >18 mm were found on vaginal ultrasound. HCG (Profasi®, 10 000 IU; Serono) was administered and ovarian puncture was performed 36 h afterwards. According to our institutional criteria as well as to the described series, if more than 20 follicles >18 mm and/or serum E2 level >4500 pg/ml were observed, donors were considered to have a high response to ovarian stimulation, which made them an extremely high risk population for the development of OHSS. Gonadotrophin administration was withheld and the GnRH agonist was maintained (coasting), until daily measurements of serum E2 levels showed that it decreased to <3500 pg/ml. HCG (10 000 IU) was then administered and ovarian puncture was performed 36 h afterwards.

Follow-up was performed by telephone contact, but donors were encouraged to contact us at any time if minimum symptoms of OHSS developed. OHSS was classified (Golan et al., 1989Go) as: mild when abdominal discomfort/distension appeared; as moderate when there also was sonographic evidence of ascites; and as severe when there was ascites plus changes in renal function, coagulation abnormalities, haemoconcentration and trouble breathing with or without hydrothorax. When OHSS appeared, treatment for each individual case was recorded.

Oocyte recipients
There were 38 oocyte recipients who shared oocytes from the donors submitted to coasting and 37 from donors not undergoing coasting. They entered our oocyte donation programme due to advanced age (n = 14), at least two previous IVF cycles with low quality oocytes/embryos (n = 13), premature ovarian failure (n = 25), genetic or chromosomal disorders not suitable for preimplantation genetic diagnosis (n = 1), or low response to ovarian stimulation (n = 22). All oocyte recipients were under hormonal replacement therapy (HRT) as previously described (Remohi et al., 1995Go). Briefly, patients with ovarian function were desensitized with a depot preparation of a GnRH agonist, which was administered in the midluteal phase of the previous cycle. HRT was started on the first day of the cycle with increasing doses of estradiol valerate (Progynova®; Schering Spain, Madrid, Spain), which were given as follows: 2 mg/day from day 1 to day 8, followed by 4 mg/day from day 9 to day 11 and then 6 mg/day from day 12 and continued until the oocyte donation was performed or until the patient had vaginal spotting, in which case the cycle was cancelled. On the 15th or 16th day after the beginning of HRT, a vaginal ultrasound, to measure endometrial thickness and pattern, and a serum E2 level were measured and oocyte donation was scheduled. The duration of estrogen priming was variable as we have shown that it does not influence the results (Remohi et al, 1995Go). Micronized progesterone (800 mg/day, intravaginal) (Progeffik; Effik Laboratories, Madrid, Spain) was started on the day of oocyte donation, and embryo transfer was performed according to each patient's individual programme on day 2 or 3. Serum ß-HCG was measured on the 12th day after embryo transfer and 20 days later pregnancy was confirmed by visualization of an embryo with heart beat, by means of a transvaginal ultrasound. Only clinical pregnancies were considered for the purpose of the study.

Embryo quality classification
On the second day of cleavage, all embryos were classified according to the number of blastomeres and cytoplasmic fragmentation (grade 1: 0% fragmentation; grade 2: <=25%; grade 3: 26–50%; grade 4: 51–75%; grade 5: >75% of the embryo surface), as well as symmetry of blastomeres (grade 1: all blastomeres with similar size, grade 2: 75% of blastomeres symmetric, grade 3: <50% with similar size) (Conaghan et al., 1993Go). The number of blastomeres with multiple nuclei was registered.

Hormonal measurements
Serum E2 was analysed using a commercially available microparticle enzyme immunoassay kit (Abbot Laboratories, Abbot Park, IL, USA). Inter- and intra-assay variability for E2 at a concentration of <40 pg/ml was 2.8 and 4.3% respectively.

Statistics
Data were expressed as mean ± SEM. Statistical calculations were performed using Sigma Stat for Windows, version 2.0 (Jandel Scientific Corporation, San Rafael, CA, USA). For comparisons, t-test, Fisher's or {chi}2-test were used when appropriate. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.


    Results
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Oocytes from 30 donors were included in this study, 15 of whom underwent coasting due to ovarian hyper-response to gonadotrophins and extreme risk of developing severe OHSS. A total of 337 fresh metaphase II oocytes were retrieved and shared with 75 recipients. Table IGo shows the general characteristics of the donors and their cycle outcome. Three (20%) oocyte donation cycles were cancelled in the coasting group: two donors in whom serum E2 levels decreased abruptly to <1000 pg/ml and another donor in whom HCG administration was incorrectly administered. In general, serum E2 levels increased 15% after the first day of coasting, decreasing gradually afterwards (–5.15, –25.1, –42.3 and –46.4% on days 2, 3, 4 and 5 of coasting respectively).


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table I. General characteristics of oocyte donors who underwent coasting and those who did not undergo coasting
 
The general characteristics and cycle outcome from oocyte recipients that shared oocytes from the donors under coasting and from donors not under coasting are listed in Table IIGo. Four (10.5%) embryo transfers were cancelled in recipients from the coasting group: two of them due to poor embryo quality (high fragmentation) and the other two due to low fertilization rate (<20%). Four (10.8%) embryo transfers were also cancelled in recipients from the non-coasting group, one due to low fertilization rate and three due to poor embryo quality.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table II. Oocyte recipients from donors who underwent coasting and from those who did not undergo coasting
 
Embryo quality was established at day 2 of cleavage, and classified according to the number of blastomeres (fewer than four, or four or more blastomeres), degree of fragmentation (grade 1–2 or 3–4), symmetry between blastomeres and percentage of multinucleated blastomeres. There were no statistically significant differences in embryo quality between groups: four or more blastomeres with fragmentation grade 1–2 (54.8 versus 64.8%), four or more blastomeres with fragmentation grade 3–4 (10.3 versus 7.1%), fewer than four blastomeres with fragmentation grade 1–2 (29 versus 19.8%), fewer than four blastomeres with fragmentation 3–4 (5.8 versus 8.2%), mean symmetry between blastomeres (1.7 versus 1.6%), and multinucleated blastomeres 1.1 versus 1.0%).

Donors were further divided into two groups according to the length of coasting: group A included oocyte donors in whom coasting lasted for <=4 days, and group B, those whose coasting lasted >4 days (coasting was not prolonged for >6 days in any donor). There were no differences between groups at the beginning of coasting (Table IIIGo). Although it was not statistically significant, the total number of oocytes and metaphase II oocytes obtained in group A was considerably larger than in group B. Interestingly, the two donors whose serum E2 level dropped abruptly to <1000 pg/ml belonged to group B. There were no differences in the incidence of OHSS between groups.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table III. Donor cycle outcome according to the duration of coasting
 
Oocyte recipients were also allocated into two groups according to whether their donor had coasting for <=4 or >4 days (groups 1 and 2 respectively). Both groups were comparable in terms of cycle outcome (Table IVGo). Again, there were no significant differences in embryo quality between groups, nor when compared with embryos from the non-coasting group. However, there was a significantly higher pregnancy rate and implantation rate in recipients from donors with <=4 days of coasting (72.2 versus 37.5% and 30.5 versus 11.3% respectively, P < 0.05). No differences were found in either miscarriage rate or cancellation rate.


View this table:
[in this window]
[in a new window]
 
Table IV. Recipient cycle outcome according to the duration of coasting in the donor
 

    Discussion
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Major efforts should be made to ensure that young, healthy volunteers, who altruistically donate oocytes, do not develop severe OHSS. We present a series of 15 oocyte donors with high responses to ovarian stimulation, in which coasting was performed. The coasting procedure was highly effective in decreasing the incidence of severe OHSS (0%) in these high risk patients, while allowing continuation of the oocyte donation cycle. There were 38 oocyte recipients who shared oocytes from donors undergoing coasting, showing excellent fertilization rate (80.7%), implantation rate (22.0%) and pregnancy rate (52.9%). When coasting was prolonged for more than 4 days, implantation rate significantly decreased.

High serum E2 levels have been shown to be detrimental to oocytes/embryos, as suggested by diminished implantation and pregnancy rates as well as embryo development rate (Simon et al., 1995Go; Valbuena et al., 2001Go). All our donors had very high serum E2 levels when coasting was started. However, there are no data available on how this might affect the oocyte once serum E2 levels begin to decrease during coasting. Some authors report that prolonging coasting yields fewer and low quality oocytes (Waldenstrom et al., 1999Go; Al-Shawaf et al., 2001Go). Nevertheless, normal fertilization and cleavage rates have been reported even after 6 days of coasting (Sher et al., 1995Go). Prolonging coasting for >4 days was necessary in seven of our 15 oocyte donors. Although there was a trend towards obtaining fewer (15 versus 24) oocytes, it did not reach a statistically significant difference.

In our series, embryo quality does not seem to be compromised by prolonged coasting. However, the observed decrease in implantation and pregnancy rates suggests a deleterious effect of prolonged coasting in oocyte/embryo quality that we are unable to determine by our current oocyte/embryo grading systems. A second control group, with patients at similar risk for the development of OHSS, in whom coasting was not performed but where another measure had been taken to prevent OHSS, would have been an even better study design. Unfortunately, we did not do this due to the high risk of severe OHSS. Recent experimental data rule out the possibility of a relationship to hyperstimulated ovaries, which may lead to a higher proportion of abnormality in ovulated oocytes with respect to their being at inappropriate meiotic stages (Tain et al., 2000Go). Oocyte donors with prolonged coasting showed high serum E2 levels for a longer period. We might speculate that their oocytes were exposed to the deleterious effect of high E2 levels (Valbuena et al., 2001Go) for a longer period. This may partially explain the reduced implantation and pregnancy rates observed in this group of donors. Nevertheless, we cannot rule out that the lack of FSH administration during coasting and the reduced circulating FSH levels may affect the final stages of follicular growth and maturation.

It has been suggested that FSH induces the formation of LH receptors (Waldenstrom et al., 1999Go) and inhibits apoptosis in granulosa cells (Tortoriello et al., 1998Go). When withholding gonadotrophins during coasting, small follicles undergo atresia, while the large follicles are capable of continuing their growth and maturation process since they possess the cellular machinery to withstand the depletion of FSH (Dhont et al., 1998Go). However, if coasting is continued beyond a certain and still undetermined point, even the large follicles will undergo atresia, resulting in a small number of oocytes of low quality (Al-Shawaf et al., 2001Go). During prolonged coasting there may be changes in the follicular milieu not only of E2 levels, but of other hormones too (androgens, E2:androgen ratio), which may affect the oocyte quality.

Endometrial receptivity could be impaired in patients undergoing coasting, as in most high responder IVF patients (Simón et al., 1995Go; Valbuena et al., 2001Go). However, our model did not address this issue. In fact, oocyte recipients from both groups were comparable in terms of endometrial receptivity as evaluated by serum E2 levels, endometrial thickness, and patient age. Thus, the oocyte donation model is a useful tool to confirm that coasting does not compromise oocyte/embryo quality unless it is prolonged for >4 days, when both implantation and pregnancy rates drop significantly.

The reasons why coasting is effective in decreasing the risk of OHSS are still unknown. Initially coasting was proposed as an effective method of totally avoiding severe OHSS (Sher et al., 1993Go, 1995Go), but severe OHSS may still appear in women undergoing coasting. Coasting has proven to be safe and effective in diminishing the risk of severe OHSS to 2–20% (Dhont et al., 1998Go; Lee et al., 1998Go; Tortoriello et al., 1998Go; Egbase et al., 1999Go; Fluker et al., 1999Go; Waldenstrom et al., 1999Go; Al-Shawaf et al., 2001Go). A reduction of severe OHSS from 80% to a maximum of 20% (Lee et al., 1998Go; Fluker et al., 1999Go) is a remarkable achievement. However, a better understanding of the coasting procedure, as well as of OHSS pathogenesis, should reduce this risk even further. Coasting is also effective in decreasing the risk of OHSS in women with polycystic ovaries (Ohata et al., 2000Go). In our oocyte donors, no case of severe OHSS was diagnosed, and all cases of mild/moderate OHSS were appropriately managed on ambulatory bases. As suggested by other authors (Dhont et al., 1998Go; Waldenstrom et al., 1999Go), the incidence of OHSS did not change with the duration of coasting, stressing the concept that multiple factors are involved in the pathogenesis of OHSS (Lee et al., 1998Go).

Coasting is effective in decreasing the risk of severe OHSS only when serum E2 levels are allowed to fall to a ‘safe’ level before HCG administration. In two of our donors, we obtained fewer than five oocytes after ovarian puncture and they both belonged to the prolonged coasting group (>4 days). These two donors had an abrupt decrease in serum E2 levels to values <1000 pg/ml. In such cases, cycle cancellation is advised as a very poor outcome is predictable (Al-Shawaf et al., 2001Go).

In conclusion, coasting is a safe and effective procedure for decreasing the risk of severe OHSS in voluntary, healthy young oocyte donors with high response to ovarian stimulation. Although it does not abolish completely the incidence of OHSS, it decreases its severity and makes ambulatory management possible. Coasting also reduces the number of cycles cancelled in this high risk population, allowing oocyte retrieval to proceed. As a whole, the outcome of oocyte donation from donors undergoing coasting is not impaired, as good implantation rate and pregnancy rate are achieved. However, if coasting in oocyte donors is prolonged for >4 days there is a significant decrease in implantation and pregnancy rates, probably due to a decrease in oocyte quality.


    Notes
 
4 To whom correspondence should be addressed at: IVI-Madrid, C/ Santiago de Compostela 88, 28035 Madrid, Spain. E-mail: jgvelasco{at}ivi.es Back


    References
 Top
 Abstract
 Introduction
 Materials and methods
 Results
 Discussion
 References
 
Al-Shawaf, T., Zosmer, A., Hussain, S., Tozer, A., Panay, N., Wilson, C., Lower, A.M. and Grudzinskas, J.G. (2001) Prevention of severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome in IVF with or without ICSI and embryo transfer: a modified ‘coasting’ strategy based on ultrasound for identification of high-risk patients. Hum. Reprod., 16, 24–30.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Benadiva, C.A., Davis, O., Kligman, I., Momjy, M., Liu, H.C. and Rosenwaks, Z. (1997) Withholding gonadotropin administration is an effective alternative for the prevention of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. Fertil. Steril., 67, 724–727.[ISI][Medline]

Conaghan, J., Hardy, K., Handyside, A.H., Winston, R. and Leese, H. (1993) Selection criteria for human embryo transfer: a comparison of pyruvate uptake and morphology. J. Assist. Reprod. Genet., 10, 21–30.[ISI][Medline]

Dhont, M., Van der Straeten, F. and De Sutter, P. (1998) Prevention of severe ovarian hyperstimulation by coasting. Fertil. Steril., 70, 847–850.[ISI][Medline]

Egbase, P.E., Sharhan, M.A. and Grudzinskas, J.G. (1999) Early unilateral follicular aspiration compared with coasting for the prevention of severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome: a prospective randomized study. Hum. Reprod., 14, 1421–1425.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Fluker, M.R., Hooper, W.M. and Yuzpe, A.A. (1999) Withholding gonadotropins (‘coasting’) to minimize the risk of ovarian hyperstimulation during superovulation and in vitro fertilization–embryo transfer cycles. Fertil. Steril., 71, 294–301.[ISI][Medline]

Golan, A., Ron-El, R., Herman, A., Soffer, Y., Weinraub, Z. and Caspi, E. (1989) Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome: an update review. Obstet. Gynecol. Surv., 44, 430–440.[Medline]

Lee, C., Tummon, I., Martin, J., Nisker, J., Power, S. and Tekpetey, F. (1998) Does withholding gonadotrophin administration prevent severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome? Hum. Reprod., 13, 1157–1158.[Abstract]

Ohata, Y., Harada, T., Ito, M., Yoshida, S., Iwabe, T. and Terakawa, N. (2000) Coasting may reduce the severity of the ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome in patients with polycystic ovary syndrome. Gynecol. Obstet. Invest., 50, 186–188.[ISI][Medline]

Peinado, J.A. and Russell, S.E. (1990) The Spanish law governing assisted reproduction techniques: a summary. Hum. Reprod., 5, 634–636.[ISI][Medline]

Remohi, J., Gutierrez, A., Cano, F., Ruiz, A., Simón, C. and Pellicer, A. (1995) Long oestradiol replacement in an oocyte donation programme. Hum. Reprod., 10, 1387–1391.[Abstract]

Remohi, J., Gartner, B., Gallardo, E., Yalil, S., Simón, C. and Pellicer, A. (1997) Pregnancy and birth rates after oocyte donation. Fertil. Steril., 67, 717–723.[ISI][Medline]

Sauer, M.V. (2001) Defining the incidence of serious complications experienced by oocyte donors: a review of 1000 cases. Am. J. Obstet. Gynecol., 184, 277–178.[ISI][Medline]

Sauer, M.V., Paulson, R.J. and Lobo, R.A. (1996) Rare occurrence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome in oocyte donors. Int. J. Gynaecol. Obstet., 52, 259–262.[ISI][Medline]

Sher, G., Salem, R., Feinman, M., Dodge, S., Zouves, C. and Knutzen, V. (1993) Eliminating the risk of life-endangering complications following overstimulation with menotropin fertility agents: a report on women undergoing in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer. Obstet. Gynecol., 81, 1009–1011.[Abstract]

Sher, G., Zouves, C., Feinman, M. and Maassarani, G. (1995) ‘Prolonged coasting’: an effective method for preventing severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome in patients undergoing in-vitro fertilization. Hum. Reprod., 10, 3107–3109.[Abstract]

Simón, C., Cano, F., Valbuena, D., Remohi, J. and Pellicer, A. (1995) Clinical evidence for a detrimental effect on uterine receptivity of high serum oestradiol concentrations in high and normal responder patients. Hum. Reprod., 10, 2432–2437.[Abstract]

Tain, C.F., Goh, V.H. and Ng, S.C. (2000) Effects of hyperstimulation with gonadotrophins and age of females on oocytes and their metaphase II status in rats. Mol. Reprod. Dev., 55, 104–108.[ISI][Medline]

Tortoriello, D.V., McGovern, P.G., Colon, J.M., Loughlin, J. and Santoro, N. (1998) ‘Coasting’ does not adversely affect cycle outcome in a subset of highly responsive in vitro fertilization patients. Fertil. Steril., 69, 454–460.[ISI][Medline]

Valbuena, D., Martin, J., de Pablo, J.L., Remohi, J., Pellicer, A. and Simón, C. (2001) Increasing levels of estradiol are deleterious to embryonic implantation because they directly affect the embryo. Fertil. Steril., 76, 962–968.[ISI][Medline]

Waldenstrom, U., Kahn, J., Marsk, L. and Nilsson, S. (1999) High pregnancy rates and successful prevention of severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome by ‘prolonged coasting’ of very hyperstimulated patients: a multicentre study. Hum. Reprod., 14, 294–297.[Abstract/Free Full Text]

Whelan, J.G., III and Vlahos, N.F. (2000) The ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. Fertil. Steril., 73, 883–896.[ISI][Medline]

Submitted on January 3, 2002; accepted on March 19, 2002.