目的通过对满足特定条件的患者在冻融胚胎移植(FET)中使用降调节+雌孕激素方案(降调节+E-P方案)作为子宫内膜准备方法,并与自然周期方案、口服避孕药+雌孕激素方案(OC+E-P方案)的相关资料进行比较,探讨降调节+E-P方案作为子宫内膜准备方法在FET中的临床应用价值。方法收集2011年3月~2012年12月在该中心进行FET的639个周期的相关资料,回顾性分析降调节+E-P方案与自然周期方案及OC+E-P方案组患者年龄、体重指数、不孕年限、基础内分泌水平、决定移植日内膜厚度及形态、平均移植胚胎数、移植优质胚胎数、生化妊娠率、临床妊娠率及异位妊娠率等是否存在差异。结果 3种子宫内膜准备方案组患者年龄、体重指数、不孕年限、基础内分泌水平、移植胚胎数、移植优质胚胎数、优质胚胎率及决定移植日子宫内膜厚度比较,差异均无统计学意义(P>0.05);降调节+E-P方案组患者生化妊娠率及临床妊娠率高于自然周期方案组和OC+E-P方案组,3组生化妊娠率及临床妊娠率比较,差异均有统计学意义(P<0.05),而3组异位妊娠率比较,差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。结论对于多次FET失败的患者,降调节雌孕激素方案与自然周期方案及OC+E-P方案相比,可获得更好的临床妊娠率,降调节雌孕激素方案可作为多次FET失败患者的可行助孕方法。对于FET周期内膜准备方法的选择,应针对不同的患者采用不同的方案进行个体化治疗。 OBJECTIVES: To use endometriosis regimen + estrogen / progesterone regimen (nadir + EP regimen) in frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) as a preparation for endometrial preparations for patients meeting certain conditions and in combination with the natural cycle regimen, oral contraceptive + Progesterone program (OC + EP program) of the relevant data were compared to explore the reduction of the program + EP as endometrial preparation in FET in the clinical value. Methods The data of 639 cycles of FET in this center from March 2011 to December 2012 were collected. The data of age-adjusted, EP, natural-phase regimen and OC + EP regimen were analyzed retrospectively for age, BMI and infertility Age, basal endocrine level, the thickness and morphology of endometrium on day of transplantation, the average number of embryos transferred, the number of high quality embryos transferred, the rate of biochemical pregnancy, the rate of clinical pregnancy and the rate of ectopic pregnancy. Results The age, BMI, duration of infertility, basal endocrine level, the number of embryos transferred, the number of high quality embryos transferred, the rate of high quality embryos and the endometrial thickness at the day of transplantation were not significantly different between the three endometrial preparation groups (P> 0.05). The biochemical pregnancy rate and clinical pregnancy rate of patients in the normotensive + EP regimen group were higher than that of the natural cycle regimen group and the OC + EP regimen group. There were statistically significant differences in the rates of biochemical pregnancy and clinical pregnancy between the three groups (P <0.05), while there was no significant difference in the ectopic pregnancy rate between the three groups (P> 0.05). Conclusions For patients with failed FETs, the progestational and progesterone-lowering regimens achieved better clinical pregnancy rates compared to the natural and OC + EP regimens, and the progestational and progesterone-lowering regimens could be used as multiple FET failed patients Feasible method of pregnancy. For the FET cycle preparation of the membrane selection method, should be for different patients with different programs for individual treatment.