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]
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]
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]
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]
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.
