Comparison of in vitro maturation and in vitro fertilization for polycystic ovary syndrome patients—reply letter
We thank for comments from Wu et al. (1) on our research (2) comparison between in vitro maturation (IVM) and in vitro fertilization (IVF) for polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS).
Reviewer Wu et al. (1) said that we demonstrated that IVM might be a suitable option for PCOS in terms of cost and successful pregnancy rate. Whereas, the study had no results about cost comparison between IVM and IVF. We found this was a careless conclusion, and we suggest to correct discussion part of abstract to “Our study suggests that IVM had similar clinical effects compared to IVF in patients with PCOS”.
Secondly, they said we performed the sensitivity analysis only by removing Shavit et al.’s 2014 study (3) and only reported I2 value. Actually, we conducted sensitivity analysis by removing all the included articles one by one and only reported the biggest change one. According to his advice, we can change the sensitivity analysis to “We performed a sensitivity analysis by removing Shavit et al.’s 2014 study (3), and I2 changed from 48% to 39% and RR changed from 0.93 to 0.95, which indicated that the results of included articles were robust”.
Thirdly, they indicated that we made a mistake of live birth rate heterogeneity analysis. We do appreciate the advice, and we want to correct the heterogeneity analysis of live birth rate into “For live birth rate, seven studies with 1,234 patients were selected. Meta-analysis showed that, compared with the IVM group, the IVF group had a higher live birth rate (RR =0.82, 95% CI: 0.70–0.94, P=0.007, fixed-effects model), with insignificant heterogeneity (I2=26%).”
Acknowledgments
Funding: This study was supported by CAMS Innovation Fund for Medical Sciences (No. 2019-I2M-5-001), the National Science Foundation of China (No. 81730038) and the Beijing Municipal Science & Technology Commission (No. Z191100006619073).
Footnote
Provenance and Peer Review: This article was commissioned by the editorial office, Annals of Translational Medicine. The article did not undergo external peer review.
Conflicts of Interest: Both authors have completed the ICMJE uniform disclosure form (available at https://atm.amegroups.com/article/view/10.21037/atm-2022-7/coif). The authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Ethical Statement: The authors are accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
Open Access Statement: This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 4.0 International License (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0), which permits the non-commercial replication and distribution of the article with the strict proviso that no changes or edits are made and the original work is properly cited (including links to both the formal publication through the relevant DOI and the license). See: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/.
References
- Wu J, Ge L, Chen Q. Comment on “Comparison of in vitro maturation and in vitro fertilization for polycystic ovary syndrome patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis”. Ann Transl Med 2022; [Crossref]
- Xu Y, Qiao J. Comparison of in vitro maturation and in vitro fertilization for polycystic ovary syndrome patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ann Transl Med 2021;9:1235. [Crossref] [PubMed]
- Shavit T, Ellenbogen A, Michaeli M, et al. In-vitro maturation of oocytes vs in-vitro fertilization with a gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist for women with polycystic ovarian syndrome: can superiority be defined? Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2014;179:46-50. [Crossref] [PubMed]
