{"status":"ok","message-type":"work","message-version":"1.0.0","message":{"indexed":{"date-parts":[[2026,8,11]],"date-time":"2026-08-11T11:42:25Z","timestamp":1786448545328,"version":"build-2736575974"},"reference-count":36,"publisher":"Wiley","issue":"8","license":[{"start":{"date-parts":[[2021,6,1]],"date-time":"2021-06-01T00:00:00Z","timestamp":1622505600000},"content-version":"vor","delay-in-days":0,"URL":"http:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/termsAndConditions#vor"}],"content-domain":{"domain":["obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com"],"crossmark-restriction":true},"short-container-title":["J of Obstet and Gynaecol"],"published-print":{"date-parts":[[2021,8]]},"abstract":"<jats:title>Abstract<\/jats:title><jats:sec><jats:title>Aim<\/jats:title><jats:p>To compare the outcome of double ovarian stimulation (DOS) with follicular phase ovarian stimulation (FPS) per started cycle in poor ovarian responders (PORs).<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Methods<\/jats:title><jats:p>A total of 204 PORs who underwent ovulation induction for in vitro fertilization, cryopreservation of all embryos available, and frozen embryo transfer cycle were retrospectively analyzed. Of those, 146 received single FPS, and 58 received DOS. All viable embryos were cryopreserved and subsequently transferred within 1\u20136\u00a0months.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Results<\/jats:title><jats:p>The number of oocytes collected and the number of mature oocytes per started cycle were higher in the DOS group compared to the FPS group (6.0\u2009\u00b1\u20091.9 vs. 2.8\u2009\u00b1\u20091.3 and 4.3\u2009\u00b1\u20091.3 vs. 2.2\u2009\u00b1\u20091.2, respectively, <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\u00a0=\u00a00.001). Clinical pregnancy rate and live birth rate per started cycle were also significantly higher in the DOS group than the FPS group (41.4% vs. 16.4% and 36.2% vs. 15.1%, respectively, <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\u2009&lt;\u20090.001). The cancellation rate of embryo transfer due to no viable embryo was significantly lower in the DOS group (10.3%) than the FPS group (40.4%) (<jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\u00a0=\u00a00.001). In the DOS group, numbers of oocytes (3.2\u2009\u00b1\u20091.2 vs. 2.7\u2009\u00b1\u20091.1, <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\u00a0=\u00a00.006), MII oocytes (2.6\u2009\u00b1\u20091.0 vs. 2.1\u2009\u00b1\u20090.8, <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\u00a0=\u00a00.001), and cryopreserved blastocysts (1.5\u2009\u00b1\u20090.8 vs. 1.1\u2009\u00b1\u20090.7, <jats:italic>p<\/jats:italic>\u00a0=\u00a00.002) were significantly higher in the luteal ovarian stimulation compared to follicular ovarian stimulation.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec><jats:sec><jats:title>Conclusions<\/jats:title><jats:p>Live birth per started cycle with DOS is superior to FPS in PORs. Luteal phase stimulation contributes to improving pregnancy rates in these patients.<\/jats:p><\/jats:sec>","DOI":"10.1111\/jog.14871","type":"journal-article","created":{"date-parts":[[2021,6,2]],"date-time":"2021-06-02T05:59:11Z","timestamp":1622613551000},"page":"2705-2712","update-policy":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1002\/crossmark_policy","source":"Crossref","is-referenced-by-count":4,"title":["Live birth rate with double ovarian stimulation is superior to follicular phase ovarian stimulation per started cycle in poor ovarian responders"],"prefix":"10.1111","volume":"47","author":[{"given":"Serkan","family":"Oral","sequence":"first","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Halic University  Istanbul Turkey"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Meri\u00e7","family":"Karacan","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Yeni Yuzyil University  Istanbul Turkey"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"ORCID":"https:\/\/orcid.org\/0000-0002-1699-8667","authenticated-orcid":false,"given":"Ya\u015fam K.","family":"Akpak","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Tepecik Training and Research Hospital, Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology University of Health Sciences  Izmir Turkey"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Alper","family":"\u015ei\u015fmano\u011flu","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Alt\u0131nbas University  Istanbul Turkey"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]},{"given":"Ceyda","family":"Sancakl\u0131 Usta","sequence":"additional","affiliation":[{"name":"Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Bal\u0131kesir University  Bal\u0131kesir Turkey"}],"role":[{"vocabulary":"crossref","role":"author"}]}],"member":"311","published-online":{"date-parts":[[2021,6]]},"reference":[{"key":"e_1_2_7_2_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1093\/humrep\/der092"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_3_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2016.02.005"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_4_1","first-page":"970163","article-title":"A flexible multidose GnRH antagonist versus a microdose flare\u2010up GnRH agonist combined with a flexible multidose GnRH antagonist protocol in poor responders to IVF","volume":"2015","author":"\u00c7elik G\u0130","year":"2015","journal-title":"Biomed Res Int"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_5_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.theriogenology.2007.09.026"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_6_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1095\/biolreprod.104.031054"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_7_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.theriogenology.2005.05.049"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_8_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1002\/ajp.20664"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_9_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1093\/humupd\/dmr039"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_10_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s10815-010-9429-0"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_11_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1097\/GCO.0000000000000180"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_12_1","first-page":"352","article-title":"Ovarian response after random\u2010start controlled ovarian stimulation to cryopreserve oocytes in cancer patients","volume":"22","author":"Campos APC","year":"2018","journal-title":"JBRA Assist Reprod"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_13_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2014.07.741"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_14_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2016.04.006"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_15_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1111\/cen.12983"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_16_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.rbmo.2017.06.002"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_17_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S1472-6483(10)60400-2"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_18_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.3109\/09513590.2015.1081683"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_19_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.rbmo.2014.08.009"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_20_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.rbmo.2014.08.010"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_21_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1080\/14647273.2017.1287433"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_22_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.5935\/1518-0557.20170042"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_23_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2016.03.002"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_24_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1080\/09513590.2018.1435636"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_25_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.rbmo.2017.08.019"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_26_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.rbmo.2019.12.012"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_27_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.rbmo.2019.01.007"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_28_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1093\/humrep\/dey217"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_29_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.3389\/fendo.2018.00317"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_30_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2015.01.045"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_31_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2011.05.050"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_32_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1093\/humrep\/det048"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_33_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1007\/s43032-019-00012-9"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_34_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2015.02.020"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_35_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.fertnstert.2013.05.028"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_36_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/j.rbmo.2019.03.212"},{"key":"e_1_2_7_37_1","doi-asserted-by":"publisher","DOI":"10.1016\/S0015-0282(16)54667-6"}],"container-title":["Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology Research"],"original-title":[],"language":"en","link":[{"URL":"https:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.1111\/jog.14871","content-type":"application\/pdf","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/full-xml\/10.1111\/jog.14871","content-type":"application\/xml","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"text-mining"},{"URL":"https:\/\/obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/pdf\/10.1111\/jog.14871","content-type":"unspecified","content-version":"vor","intended-application":"similarity-checking"}],"deposited":{"date-parts":[[2023,8,29]],"date-time":"2023-08-29T13:30:11Z","timestamp":1693315811000},"score":1,"resource":{"primary":{"URL":"https:\/\/obgyn.onlinelibrary.wiley.com\/doi\/10.1111\/jog.14871"}},"subtitle":[],"short-title":[],"issued":{"date-parts":[[2021,6]]},"references-count":36,"journal-issue":{"issue":"8","published-print":{"date-parts":[[2021,8]]}},"alternative-id":["10.1111\/jog.14871"],"URL":"https:\/\/doi.org\/10.1111\/jog.14871","archive":["Portico"],"relation":{},"ISSN":["1341-8076","1447-0756"],"issn-type":[{"value":"1341-8076","type":"print"},{"value":"1447-0756","type":"electronic"}],"subject":[],"published":{"date-parts":[[2021,6]]},"assertion":[{"value":"2021-01-09","order":0,"name":"received","label":"Received","group":{"name":"publication_history","label":"Publication History"}},{"value":"2021-05-16","order":1,"name":"accepted","label":"Accepted","group":{"name":"publication_history","label":"Publication History"}},{"value":"2021-06-01","order":2,"name":"published","label":"Published","group":{"name":"publication_history","label":"Publication History"}}]}}