|
|
Comparison of two methods of ovulation prediction: CUE Electrolytic Method and traditional urinary LH detection. C.M. Blacker, K.S. Moghissi, I.E. Zador, K.K. Wachsmann. Dept. of OB/GYN, Wayne State University, Detroit, MI 48202. "The CUE® Electronic Fertility Monitor has been proposed as a useful adjunct in predicting ovulation. Previous reports have quoted 80% accuracy in predicting ovulation 5-7 days in advance in clomiphene citrate-induced cycles (AFS 1986 Mtg., ABS. #49). The objective of this study was to evaluate the accuracy of the CUE ovulation method." Fifteen infertile women were studied for 34 menstrual cycles. Twenty-four cycles were induced with clomiphene citrate (CC); 10 cycles were spontaneous. The first increase in urinary luteinizing hormone (LH) was documented with commercially available kits (either First Response, Ovutime, or Quidel Ovulation Test). Day of ovulation was determined by serial pelvic ultra-sounds (US) performed on day of increased LH and each subsequent day until a 30% decrease in follicular size (indicative of ovulation) was observed. Ovulation was verified by both US and elevated midluteal serum progesterone. CONCLUSION The mean interval from the LH rise to ovulation was 1.3 (+ - 0.5) days while from VR nadir to ovulation was 2.0 (+ - 1.6) days. 74% of the VR nadirs were within 2 days of ovulation by US and 81% were within 1 day of the LH rise. The mean interval from the VR nadir to the LH peak was 0.5 (+ - 1.7) days. LH surge (r = .98; p<.0005) and VR (r = 0.67; p<.005) were highly correlated with the day of ovulation on US. ***
|
|