May’s ESHRE Journal Club discussed a unique paper from Papaleo et al. (2021) that aimed to quantify the impact of the OPTIMIST trial in clinical practice (Papaleo et al., 2021). The OPTIMIST trial (Oudshoorn et al., 2017) reported that individualised FSH doses (225/450 IU/day for predicted poor responders or 100 IU/day for predicted hyper responders) for ovarian stimulation results in similar cumulative livebirth rates (LBRs) when compared with a standard dose of FSH (150 IU/day) in women undergoing their first IVF/ICSI cycle. The OPTIMIST trial is the largest randomised controlled trial (RCT) on the topic of individualised ovarian stimulation published so far that supports a ‘one-size fits all’ approach to ovarian stimulation—and it was expected to shift clinical practice in IVF. But has this RCT actually changed clinical practice?

中文翻译：

---

#ESHREjc 报告：OPTIMIST 试验和循证医学后的卵巢刺激实践

May 的 ESHRE Journal Club 讨论了 Papaleo等人的一篇独特论文。（2021 年）旨在量化 OPTIMIST 试验在临床实践中的影响（Papaleo等人，2021 年）。OPTIMIST 试验（Oudshoorn等人。, 2017) 报告称，与标准剂量的 FSH 相比，卵巢刺激的个体化 FSH 剂量（预测不良反应者为 225/450 IU/天或预测超反应者为 100 IU/天）导致相似的累积活产率（LBR）（ 150 IU/天）在接受第一个 IVF/ICSI 周期的女性中。OPTIMIST 试验是迄今为止发表的最大的关于个体化卵巢刺激主题的随机对照试验 (RCT)，它支持“一刀切”的卵巢刺激方法，并且有望改变 IVF 的临床实践。但是这个 RCT 真的改变了临床实践吗？