Skip to main navigation Skip to search Skip to main content

Effect of acupuncture for poor ovarian response: a multicenter randomized controlled trial

  • Chenchen Su
  • , Xiaoyan Wang
  • , Xin Liu
  • , Li Yang
  • , Tongsheng Su
  • , Huidan Wang
  • , Yu Li
  • , Cui Zhao
  • , Cuilian Zhang
  • , Wenpei Xiang
  • , Guoqing Tong
  • , Li Chen
  • , Fang Zhao
  • , Huanfang Xu
  • , Yigong Fang
  • China Academy of Chinese Medical Sciences
  • Shaanxi Provincial People's Hospital
  • Shandong University
  • Sun Yat-Sen University
  • The University of Hong Kong-Shenzhen Hospital
  • Lanzhou University
  • Henan Provincial People's Hospital
  • Huazhong University of Science and Technology
  • Shanghai University of Traditional Chinese Medicine
  • The First Affiliated Hospital of Xi’an Jiaotong University
  • Nanjing University
  • Luoyang Maternal and Child Health Hospital

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

1 Scopus citations

Abstract

Introduction: Acupuncture has been explored as a potential intervention for POR; however, high-quality evidence is limited. This multicenter randomized trial evaluated the effect of acupuncture on the number of oocytes retrieved following controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) in women with POR. Methods: This multicenter, randomized, controlled study was conducted at nine tertiary hospitals in China between August 2018 and March 2023, with follow-up extended through March 2024. A total of 140 women aged ≤ 40 years, who met the Bologna criteria and were eligible for the antagonist ovulation induction protocol, were recruited and randomly assigned to either an acupuncture group or a control group. The acupuncture group received 36 acupuncture sessions prior to COH, while the control group received in vitro fertilization (IVF) only. The primary outcome was the number of oocytes retrieved. Secondary outcomes included embryological parameters, ovarian reserve markers, and clinical pregnancy and live birth rates. Results: The intention-to-treat population included 140 participants. Following intervention, the number of oocytes retrieved did not differ significantly between the acupuncture group (median [IQR]: 2.00 [1.00-3.00]) and control group (median [IQR]: 2.00 [1.00-4.00]), median between-group difference: 0.00, 95% CI [-1.00, 0.00], p = 0.283). Among secondary outcomes, the cleavage rate was higher in the acupuncture group than in the control group (100% vs. 87.39%; between-group difference: 12.61%; 95% CI [6.64%, 18.57%]; p < 0.001). Basal follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) levels were lower in the acupuncture group compared to the control group (median [IQR]: 9.08 [6.53-12.8] vs. 11.31 [8.23-16.53]; between-group difference: -2.40; 95% CI [-4.76, -0.37]; p = 0.019). There were no statistically significant differences between groups in clinical pregnancy rate (34.29% vs. 21.43%; p = 0.090), live birth rate (21.43% vs. 15.71%; p = 0.385) and other prespecified outcomes. Results from the per-protocol (PP) analysis were consistent with the ITT findings. No serious adverse events were observed. Conclusions: This study did not find evidence that acupuncture significantly improves the number of oocytes retrieved in patients with POR. While it was associated with a significantly higher embryo cleavage rate and lower basal FSH levels, acupuncture did not significantly improve clinical pregnancy or live birth rates. Clinical Trial Registration: https://www.chictr.org.cn/, identifier ChiCTR1800017717.

Original languageEnglish
Article number1765527
JournalFrontiers in Endocrinology
Volume17
DOIs
StatePublished - 2026
Externally publishedYes

UN SDGs

This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)

  1. SDG 3 - Good Health and Well-being
    SDG 3 Good Health and Well-being

Keywords

  • acupuncture
  • clinical pregnancy rate
  • controlled ovarian hyperstimulation
  • poor ovarian response
  • randomized controlled trial

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Effect of acupuncture for poor ovarian response: a multicenter randomized controlled trial'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this