[Comparative Study of the Embryo Development and Clinical Outcomes of 3 Ovarian Stimulation Protocols in Different Age Groups].

Objective: The main purpose of this study is to compare the embryo development and clinical outcomes of women in different age groups undergoing Methods: We conducted a detailed analysis of patients who underwent treatment between January 2021 and February 2023. 1) In the overall patient population, we comprehensively compared the basic characteristics, the embryo development, and the clinical outcomes of patients treated with three different ovarian stimulation protocols, including the GnRH antagonist protocol group ( Results: 1) In the overall population, we found that the average number of oocytes retrieved in the GnRH agonist long protocol group was significantly higher than that in the GnRH antagonist protocol group ([13.85±7.162] vs. [13.36±7.862], Conclusion: In the younger than 30 and 30-35 age groups, the GnRH antagonist protocol showed a more significant advantage over the GnRH agonist long protocol and the early follicular phase long protocol. This suggests that for younger and middle-aged patients, the antagonist protocol may lead to better outcomes during ovarian stimulation. In the older than 35 age group, while the antagonist protocol still outperformed the GnRH agonist long protocol, there was no significant difference compared to the early follicular phase long protocol. This may imply that with increasing age, the early follicular phase long protocol may have effects similar to the antagonist protocol to some extent. The advantages of the antagonist protocol lie in its ability to reduce stimulation duration and the dosage of GnRH, while enhancing patient compliance with treatment. This means that patients may find it easier to accept and adhere to this treatment protocol, thereby improving treatment success rates. Particularly for older patients, the use of the antagonist protocol may significantly increase the blastocyst formation rate, which is crucial for improving the success rates. Although there were no significant differences in the clinical outcomes of patients treated with the three protocols in each age group, further research is still needed to validate these findings. Future multicenter studies and increased sample sizes may help comprehensively assess the efficacy of different stimulation protocols. Additionally, prospective studies are needed to further validate these findings and determine the optimal treatment strategies.