Supervisor：Ministry of Education of the People's Republic of ChinaSponsor：Sichuan University Editor-in-chief：LUO Fengming Publishing period：
Monthly
ISSN：1002-0179CN：51-1356/R
Citation：林洪波, 錢衛平, 李蓉, 張秋菊, 黃品秀. 來曲唑微刺激促排卵方案在卵巢反應低下患者的臨床應用探討. West China Medical Journal, 2015, 30(3): 502-504. doi: 10.7507/1002-0179.20150142Copy
Copyright ? the editorial department of West China Medical Journal of West China Medical Publisher. All rights reserved
1.
Galey-Fontaine J, Cédrin-Durnerin I, Chabi R, et al. Age and ovarian reserve are distinct predictive factors of cycle outcome in low responders[J]. Reprod Biomed Online, 2005, 10(1):94-99.
2.
Mohsen IA, El Din RE. Minimal stimulation protocol using letrozole versus microdose flare up GnRH agonist protocol in women with poor ovarian response undergoing ICSI[J]. Gynecol Endocrinol, 2013, 29(2):105-108.
3.
Lamazou F, Fuchs F, Grynberg M, et al. Cancellation of IVF-ET cycles:poor prognosis, poor responder, or variability of the response to controlled ovarian hyperstimualtion? An analysis of 142 cancellations[J]. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris), 2012, 41(1):41-47.
4.
La Marca A, Sighinolfi G, Radi D, et al. Anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) as a predictive marker in assisted reproductive technology (ART)[J]. Hum Reprod Update, 2010, 16(2):113-130.
Polinder S, Heijnen EM, Macklon NS, et al. Cost-effectiveness of a mild compared with a standard strategy for IVF:a randomized comparison using cumulative term live birth as the primary endpoint[J]. Hum Reprod, 2008, 23(2):316-323.
9.
Revelli A, Casano S, Salvagno F, et al. Milder is better? Advantages and disadvantages of "mild" ovarian stimulation for human in vitro fertilization[J]. Reprod Biol Endocrinol, 2011, 9:25.
1. Galey-Fontaine J, Cédrin-Durnerin I, Chabi R, et al. Age and ovarian reserve are distinct predictive factors of cycle outcome in low responders[J]. Reprod Biomed Online, 2005, 10(1):94-99.
2. Mohsen IA, El Din RE. Minimal stimulation protocol using letrozole versus microdose flare up GnRH agonist protocol in women with poor ovarian response undergoing ICSI[J]. Gynecol Endocrinol, 2013, 29(2):105-108.
3. Lamazou F, Fuchs F, Grynberg M, et al. Cancellation of IVF-ET cycles:poor prognosis, poor responder, or variability of the response to controlled ovarian hyperstimualtion? An analysis of 142 cancellations[J]. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris), 2012, 41(1):41-47.
4. La Marca A, Sighinolfi G, Radi D, et al. Anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) as a predictive marker in assisted reproductive technology (ART)[J]. Hum Reprod Update, 2010, 16(2):113-130.
8. Polinder S, Heijnen EM, Macklon NS, et al. Cost-effectiveness of a mild compared with a standard strategy for IVF:a randomized comparison using cumulative term live birth as the primary endpoint[J]. Hum Reprod, 2008, 23(2):316-323.
9. Revelli A, Casano S, Salvagno F, et al. Milder is better? Advantages and disadvantages of "mild" ovarian stimulation for human in vitro fertilization[J]. Reprod Biol Endocrinol, 2011, 9:25.
1/5
WeChat