Comparative study between single versus dual trigger for poor responders in GnRH-antagonist ICSI cycles: A randomized controlled study

Comparative analysis of hCG and dual-trigger protocols in IVF for advanced maternal age women: a single‑center retrospective cohort study based on propensity score matching

PURPOSE

This study aimed to compare the efficacy of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) and dual-trigger (gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist [GnRH-a] and hCG) protocols in terms of cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) and other pregnancy outcomes among advanced-age women.

METHODS

We enrolled 801 women aged ≥ 35 years who were experiencing infertility and beginning their first in vitro fertilization cycle at a tertiary academic medical institution between August 2015 and June 2023. Among these, 115 and 686 women used the dual-trigger and hCG methods. Propensity score matching was employed to account for confounding variables. The main outcomes evaluated were CLBR and time to live birth (TTLB).

RESULTS

The CLBR did not differ significantly between the hCG and dual-trigger groups (29.86% vs. 26.09%, P = 0.44), whereas the TTLBs of both groups were similar (9.60 vs. 10.14 months, P = 0.72). CLBR results were similar for both groups, according to a Kaplan-Meier analysis (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.95; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.63-1.43; P = 0.82). After a multiple Cox proportional hazards model was established, the CLBR of the hCG group remained comparable with that of the dual-trigger group (HR = 0.83; 95% CI 0.53-4.11; P = 0.39). The subgroup analysis also showed similar findings.

CONCLUSION

Considering the higher fertilization rate and shorter TTLB, the dual-trigger protocol may be more suitable than the hCG trigger protocol.

Therapeutic management in women with a diminished ovarian reserve: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

IMPORTANCE

The clinical management of women with diminished ovarian reserve (DOR) is a challenge in the field of medically assisted reproduction. Several therapeutic strategies have been proposed, but with mixed results, mainly because the definition of DOR used was inconsistent among trials.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate adjuvant treatments and protocols involving only women with DOR according to POSEIDON (Patient-Oriented Strategies Encompassing IndividualizeD Oocyte Number) criteria.

DATA SOURCES

We conducted a systematic search using the MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, and ISI Web of Knowledge databases to identify relevant studies published up to June 2024.The review protocol was registered at http://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/ (registration number: CRD42022346117).

STUDY SELECTION AND SYNTHESIS

After duplication removal, the titles and abstracts of 4,806 articles were scrutinized, and 124 full-text articles were assessed for eligibility. In total, 38 randomized controlled trials were included in the qualitative/quantitative analysis. The following interventions were evaluated: dehydroepiandrosterone (n = 1,336); testosterone (n = 418); high- vs. low-dose gonadotropin (n = 957); delayed-start protocol with gonadotropin hormone-releasing hormone antagonist (n = 398); letrozole (n = 612); clomiphene citrate (1,113); growth hormone (311); luteal phase stimulation (n = 57); dual triggering (n = 139); dual stimulation (168); luteinizing hormone (979); oestradiol pretreatment (n = 552); and corifollitropin alfa (n = 561).

MAIN OUTCOMES

The primary outcome was live birth rate or ongoing pregnancy if data on live birth were unavailable. Secondary outcomes were number of oocytes retrieved, number of metaphase II oocytes, clinical pregnancy rate and miscarriage rate.

RESULTS

Testosterone supplementation is associated with higher live birth rates compared with nonsupplemented women among all interventions evaluated (odds ratio: 2.19, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.11-4.32, four studies, 368 patients). Testosterone (weighted mean difference [WMD] 0.88, 95% CI: 0.03-1.72; 4 studies, n = 368 patients), dehydroepiandrosterone (WMD 0.60, 95% CI: 0.07-1.13; 4 studies, n = 418 patients), and delayed started protocol (WMD 1.32, 95% CI: 0.74 to 1.89; 3 studies, n = 398 patients) significantly improved the total number of eggs collected. Lower number of oocytes retrieved is achieved in women undergoing low dose gonadotropin regimen vs high dose (WMD: -1.57, 95% CI: -2.12 to -1.17; 2 studies, n = 905 patients), The other interventions did not produce significant improvements.

CONCLUSION AND RELEVANCE

Specific interventions such as testosterone seem to correlate with a better live birth rate in women with DOR; these findings should be further explored in randomized trials.

Dual trigger versus human chorionic gonadotropin trigger for blastocyst quality and cumulative live birth

PURPOSE

To evaluate the difference in the number of euploid blastocysts and cumulative live birth rate (LBR) between dual and human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) triggers in poor and normal ovarian responders undergoing preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) cycles.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study was enrolled from July 2018 to December 2021 and followed up until June 2024 at a single reproductive medical center. Overall, 1040 in vitro fertilization (IVF)-PGT and 784 frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) cycles were assessed. Dual (triptorelin acetate 0.2 mg and recombinant hCG [rhCG] 250 µg) or hCG (rhCG 250 µg) trigger was used for oocyte maturation in the gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol and PGT cycles. We assessed the embryo outcomes and FET cumulative pregnancy outcomes.

RESULTS

The number of oocytes retrieved (10.17 ± 5.22 vs 10.27 ± 5.14, P = 0.789), MII oocytes (8.24 ± 4.26 vs 8.28 ± 4.05, P = 0.888), blastocysts (2.16 ± 1.50 vs 2.12 ± 1.49, P = 0.729), euploid blastocysts (1.06 ± 1.14 vs 1.09 ± 1.23, P = 0.726), and the rate of cumulative LBR (24.9% vs 24.9%, P = 1.000) in the dual trigger group were comparable with those in the hCG group. The trigger method was not correlated with higher LBR based on logistic regression analysis (odds ratio[OR] = 1.040 [0.778-1.392], P = 0.790).

CONCLUSION

For poor and normal ovarian responders, the dual trigger, compared with the hCG trigger, did not improve the PGT embryo outcomes and FET cumulative pregnancy outcomes.

GnRH agonist-only trigger, compared to dual trigger, reduces oocyte retrieval rate in high responders without affecting cumulative live birth rate

Introduction

This study compared, in high responders undergoing IVF treatment, GnRH agonist-only trigger and dual trigger on oocyte retrieval rate and cumulative live birth rate (LBR). The aim was to determine if the GnRH agonist-only triggers had provided outcomes comparable to dual trigger, while minimizing the risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS).

Materials and methods

A retrospective, matched case-control study was conducted at Taichung Veterans General Hospital, Taiwan, including women who underwent IVF/ICSI between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2022. Inclusion criteria were: GnRH antagonist protocol and estrogen level >3,000 pg/ml on trigger day. Exclusion criteria were: immune/metabolic diseases, donated oocytes, and mixed stimulation cycles. Propensity score matching was applied to balance age, AMH level, and oocyte number between the GnRH agonist-only and dual trigger groups. Outcomes were analyzed for patients who had complete treatment cycles, focusing on oocyte retrieval rate and cumulative LBR.

Results

We analyzed 116 cycles in the agonist-only group, and 232 cycles in the dual trigger group. No inter-group difference was found in their age, BMI, and AMH levels. The dual trigger group had a higher oocyte retrieval rate (93% vs. 80%; p <0.05), while fertilization rates, blastocyst formation rates, and cumulative LBR were comparable. Notably, no OHSS cases had been reported in the GnRH agonist-only group, compared with 7 cases in the dual trigger group.

Conclusion

GnRH agonist-only triggers resulted in a lower oocyte retrieval rate compared to dual triggers but did not significantly affect cumulative LBR in high responders. This approach effectively reduces OHSS risk without compromising pregnancy outcomes, making it a preferable option in freeze-all strategies, despite a longer oocyte pick-up duration and a medium cost. GnRH agonist-only trigger, however, may not be suitable for fresh embryo transfers or patients with low serum LH levels on trigger day.

Co-administration of GnRH-agonist and hCG (double trigger) for final oocyte maturation increases the number of top-quality embryos in patients undergoing IVF/ICSI cycles

BACKGROUND

The utilization of a double trigger, involving the co-administration of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) and human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) for final oocyte maturation, is emerging as a novel approach in gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH-ant) protocols during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH). This protocol involves administering GnRH-a and hCG 40 and 34 h prior to ovum pick-up (OPU), respectively. This treatment modality has been implemented in patients with low/poor oocytes yield. This study aimed to determine whether the double trigger could improve the number of top-quality embryos (TQEs) in patients with fewer than three TQEs.

METHODS

The stimulation characteristics of 35 in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles were analyzed. These cycles were triggered by the combination of hCG and GnRHa (double trigger cycles) and compared to the same patients' previous IVF attempt, which utilized the hCG trigger (hCG trigger control cycles). The analysis involved cases who were admitted to our reproductive center between January 2018 and December 2022. In the hCG trigger control cycles, all 35 patients had fewer than three TQEs.

RESULTS

Patients who received the double trigger cycles yielded a significantly higher number of 2PN cleavage embryos (3.54 ± 3.37 vs. 2.11 ± 2.15, P = 0.025), TQEs ( 2.23 ± 2.05 vs. 0.89 ± 0.99, P < 0.001), and a simultaneously higher proportion of the number of cleavage stage embryos (53.87% ± 31.38% vs. 39.80% ± 29.60%, P = 0.043), 2PN cleavage stage embryos (43.89% ± 33.01% vs. 27.22% ± 27.13%, P = 0.014), and TQEs (27.05% ± 26.26% vs. 14.19% ± 19.76%, P = 0.019) to the number of oocytes retrieved compared with the hCG trigger control cycles, respectively. The double trigger cycles achieved higher rates of cumulative clinical pregnancy (20.00% vs. 2.86%, P = 0.031), cumulative persistent pregnancy (14.29% vs. 0%, P < 0.001), and cumulative live birth (14.29% vs. 0%, P < 0.001) per stimulation cycle compared with the hCG trigger control cycles.

CONCLUSION

Co-administration of GnRH-agonist and hCG for final oocyte maturation, 40 and 34 h prior to OPU, respectively (double trigger) may be suggested as a valuable new regimen for treating patients with low TQE yield in previous hCG trigger IVF/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles.

Comparison of pregnancy outcomes in women with normal ovarian response to the gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist protocol using different trigger methods: a single-center retrospective cohort study based on propensity score matching

PURPOSE

To investigate whether gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) combined with human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG) can improve pregnancy outcomes in patients with normal ovarian response (NOR).

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study, data of 404 NOR patients undergoing fresh embryo transfer (ET) from 2018 to 2022 were studied. Patients were divided into HCG group and HCG plus GnRH-a group according to trigger methods. After confounding factors were controlled by propensity score matching, 67 cases were included in HCG group and HCG plus GnRH-a group, respectively, and pregnancy outcomes were assessed. Basal data, ovarian stimulation, embryological data and pregnancy outcomes were compared. The effect of trigger methods on pregnancy outcomes was analyzed by binary logistic regression.

RESULTS

There was no statistically significant differences in embryological data, embryo implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rate, live birth rate of ET, number of fresh embryos transferred and total number of embryos transferred after one cycle of oocyte retrieval. While, cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) was better in the dual-trigger group than in the HCG group. The binary logistic regression analysis indicated that the trigger methods had an independent influence on embryo implantation and cumulative live birth.

CONCLUSIONS

During IVF/ICSI, dual-trigger could potentially play a role in improving oocyte quality, ensuring embryo implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rate, live birth rate of ET and cumulative live birth rate at the end of one ovum pick-up (OPU) cycle, and reducing the physical, temporal and financial negative consequences due to repeated OPU cycle.

Does dual oocyte retrieval with continuous FSH administration increase the number of mature oocytes in low responders? An open-label randomized controlled trial

STUDY QUESTION

Is there an increase in the total number of metaphase II (MII) oocytes between a conventional ovarian stimulation (OS) and a double uninterrupted stimulation?

SUMMARY ANSWER

There is no increase in the total number of MII oocytes when comparing one conventional OS to a continuous stimulation with double oocyte aspiration.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Based on the concept of multiple follicular waves, the combination of two stimulations in the same ovarian cycle has gained interest in patients with a low ovarian reserve. This so-called dual stimulation approach is usually characterized by a discontinuation of FSH administration for ∼5 days and appears to have a favourable impact on the number of retrieved oocytes without affecting the embryo quality or ploidy status. The outcomes of dual uninterrupted OS have not yet been studied.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

This was an open-label randomized controlled trial (RCT) with superiority design, performed in a single tertiary centre. Subjects were randomized with a 1:1 allocation into two groups between October 2019 and September 2021. All patients underwent a conventional stimulation with recombinant FSH. When two or more follicles of 17 mm were present, the final inclusion criterion was assessed; randomization occurred only in the presence of ≤9 follicles of ≥11 mm. In Group A, ovulation was triggered with hCG, and oocyte retrieval (OR) was performed 34-36 h later, followed by a fresh single or double embryo transfer (SET or DET) on Day 3/5. In Group B, ovulation was triggered with GnRH agonist, followed by another OS, without discontinuation of the FSH administration. In the presence of one or more follicles of ≥17 mm, the second stimulation was completed with hCG. A freeze-all strategy (Day 3/5) was applied for both retrievals, followed by transfer of one or two embryos in an artificially prepared frozen-thawed cycle. In the absence of one or more follicles of ≥17 mm after 13 additional days of stimulation, the second cycle was cancelled. All ORs were executed by a senior fertility specialist who was blinded for the first treatment, and all follicles >10 mm were aspirated, according to routine clinical practice. The primary outcome was the total number of MII oocytes. Patients were followed up until all embryos were transferred, or until live birth was achieved. Other secondary outcomes included the number of cumulus-oocyte complexes (COCs), the number of good quality embryos (Day 3/5), the ongoing pregnancy rate, and gonadotropin consumption.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Patients between 25 and 40 years old, with an anti-Müllerian hormone level of ≤1.5 ng/ml, antral follicle count of ≤6, or ≤5 oocytes after a previous stimulation, were included. At the start, 70 patients were eligible for participation in the trial, of whom 48 patients fulfilled the final inclusion criterium and were randomized. After drop-out of two patients, 23 patients were randomized to a single round of OS (Group A), and 23 patients were randomized to two uninterrupted rounds of OS (Group B).

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

Baseline characteristics were similar between both groups. The cumulative number of COCs and MII oocytes after completion of the second OR was similar in Group A and Group B [5.3 ± 2.7 versus 5.3 ± 3.0 (P = 0.95); 4.1 ± 2.4 versus 4.3 ± 2.7 (P = 0.77)]. Likewise, a comparable number of excellent and good quality embryos was available on Day 3 (3.0 ± 2.0 versus 2.7 ± 2.0; P = 0.63). In Group B, the cancellation rate due to insufficient response to the second round of stimulation was 39.1% (9/23). When focusing on the first stimulation in both groups, there were no significant differences regarding basal FSH, gonadotropin consumption, and the number of preovulatory follicles. After the first OR, the mean number of COC and MII oocytes was significantly higher in Group A (who had hCG triggering), compared to Group B (who had GnRH agonist triggering) [5.3 ± 2.7 versus 3.3 ± 2.2; difference 95% CI (0.54 to 3.45), P = 0.004 and 4.1 ± 2.4 versus 3.0 ± 2.2; difference 95% CI (-0.15 to 2.6), P = 0.05, respectively]. Likewise, the number of excellent and good quality embryos on Day 3 was significantly higher (3.0 ± 2.0 versus 1.9 ± 1.7; P = 0.02) in Group A.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

This study was powered to demonstrate superiority for the number of MII oocytes after dual stimulation. Investigating the impact of dual stimulation on pregnancy rates would have required a larger sample size. Furthermore, the heterogeneity in embryo vitrification and transfer policies precluded a correct comparison of embryologic outcomes between both groups.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

This is the first RCT investigating the role of continuous stimulation with double aspiration in low responders. Our results show no statistically significant differences in the cumulative number of MII oocytes between one conventional stimulation with fresh ET and two consecutive stimulations with a freeze-only approach. Furthermore, the observed suboptimal oocyte yield after agonist ovulation triggering in low responders in the dual uninterrupted OS group is a reason for concern and further scrutiny, given that previous RCTs have shown similar outcomes in normal and high responders after hCG and GnRH agonist triggers.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

This work was supported in part by a research grant from Organon. H.T. received honoraria for lectures and presentations from Abbott, Cooper Surgical, Gedeon-Richter, Cook, Goodlife, and Ferring. L.B. received fees for lectures from Merck & Organon and support for attending ESHRE 2023. M.D.V. reports fees for lectures from Ferring, Merck, Organon, IBSA, Gedeon Richter, and Cooper Surgical and support for attending ASRM 2023. S.M. received honoraria for lectures and presentations from Abbott, Cooper Surgical, Gedeon-Richter, IBSA, and Merck. C.B. was on the Advisory board and received consulting fees from Theramex and received honoraria for lectures and presentations from Abbott, Ferring, Gedeon-Richter, IBSA, and Merck.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03846544.

TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE

19 February 2019.

DATE OF FIRST PATIENT’S ENROLMENT

28 October 2019.

Cycle outcomes of dual trigger (GnRH agonist+hCG) versus human chorionic gonadotropin trigger alone in POSEDION group 3-4 poor-responders and normo-responders: A prospective randomized study

INTRODUCTION

Recently, dual trigger was proposed in an attempt to improve in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycle outcomes in poor and normo-responder patients (PR and NR, respectively). The study's aim was to compare cycle outcomes of dual trigger versus human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) trigger in NRs and POSEIDON group 3/4 (PG 3/4) PRs.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

A prospective randomized controlled trial included PG 3/4 PRs and NRs undergoing IVF using a gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol. PRs and NRs were divided into two subgroups: (1) study groups in both arms received dual trigger and (2) control groups received only HCG.

RESULTS

Two-hundred twenty-five women participated in the study. The mean patient age was significantly higher in the dual trigger group versus the HCG trigger group in PG 3/4 PRs. The number of retrieved oocytes and MII oocytes and the number of patients with good quality embryos were comparable between groups and live birth rates (LBR) per embryo transfer (ET) were significantly higher in the HCG group versus the dual trigger group in PG3/4 PRs (39.2% versus 19.2%; p = 0.026). NR dual trigger and HCG trigger groups were comparable in terms of patient age and LBR per ET did not significantly differ between these groups. The number of patients with good quality embryos was significantly higher in the dual trigger group versus the HCG group in NRs CONCLUSION: Dual trigger does not seem to add additional benefits in terms of live birth rates in PG3/4 PRs and NRs. Nonetheless, considering the age difference and lack of homogenity in the number and day of embryos transferred in PG 3/4 PRs, major conclusion that can be drawn from the study is that dual trigger is not systematically useful even in poor responders since the number of mature oocytes is comparable between groups. Larger scale studies are required for additional potential implications.

Triggering of ovulation for GnRH-antagonist cycles in normal and low ovarian responders undergoing IVF/ICSI: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a systematic review andmeta-analysis of all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that investigated whether dual triggering [a combination of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist and human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG)] of final oocyte maturation can improve the number of oocytes retrieved and clinical pregnancy rate in low or normal responders undergoing in-vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI) cycles using a GnRH-antagonist protocol.

STUDY DESIGN

Studies up to October 2022 were identified from PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane Library and Web of Science. The risk of bias of included studies was assessed. Dichotomous outcomes were reported as relative risks (RR), and continuous outcomes were reported as weighted mean differences (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). The primary outcomes were number of oocytes retrieved, number of mature [metaphase II (MII)] oocytes, clinical pregnancy rate and ongoing pregnancy rate; other IVF outcomes were considered as secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

Seven studies were identified, and 898 patients were eligible for inclusion in this meta-analysis. The results showed that the number of oocytes retrieved [WMD = 1.38 (95% CI 0.47-2.28), I2 = 66%, p = 0.003, low evidence], number of MII oocytes [WMD = 0.7 (95% CI 0.35-1.05), I2 = 42%, p < 0.0001, moderate evidence], number of embryos [WMD = 0.68 (95% CI 0.07-1.3), I2 = 67%, p = 0.03, low evidence] and number of good-quality embryos [WMD = 1.14 (95% CI 0.35-1.93), I2 = 0%, p = 0.005, moderate evidence] in the dual trigger group were significantly higher than in the hCG trigger group. The results of the ovarian response subgroup analysis showed significant differences in all of these outcomes in normal responders, and no differences in any of the outcomes in low responders, except for the number of MII oocytes. In low responders, clinical pregnancy rates may be improved in the dual trigger group [RR = 2.2 (95% CI 1.05-4.61), I2 = 28%, p = 0.04, low evidence].

CONCLUSION

Dual triggering by GnRH agonist and hCG improved oocyte maturity and embryo grading for normal responders in GnRH-antagonist cycles. Dual triggering for final oocyte maturation may improve clinical pregnancy rates in low responders.

Dual trigger improves the pregnancy rate in fresh in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles compared with the human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) trigger: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials

PROPOSE

The purpose of this study was to assess whether the implementation of a "dual trigger" approach, utilizing gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) and human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) in the GnRH antagonist protocol for in vitro fertilization (IVF), leads to improved pregnancy outcomes compared to the conventional hCG trigger alone. Previous meta-analyses have not provided sufficient evidence to support the superiority of the dual trigger over the hCG trigger in fresh or frozen embryo transfer cycles. Thus, a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials were conducted to provide a comprehensive evaluation of the impact of the dual trigger on pregnancy outcomes in fresh or frozen embryo transfer cycles.

METHOD

A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were conducted. We searched the Medline and Embase databases for articles up to 2023 by using search terms: "dual trigger," "GnRHa," "hCG," "IVF." Eligible RCTs comparing the dual trigger with the hCG trigger were included. The primary outcome was the live birth rate (LBR) per cycle. The secondary outcomes were the number of oocytes retrieved, number of mature oocytes retrieved, implantation rate, biochemical pregnancy rate, CPR, miscarriage rate and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) rate per started cycle We compared the oocyte maturation and pregnancy outcomes in the dual trigger and hCG trigger groups. In patients undergoing fresh embryo transfer (ET) and frozen-thawed ET, we also conducted a subgroup analysis to evaluate whether dual trigger improves the clinical pregnancy rate (CPR).

RESULTS

We included 10 randomised studies, with 825 participants in the dual trigger group and 813 in the hCG trigger group. Compared with the hCG trigger, dual trigger was associated with a significant increase in the LBR per cycle (odds ratio (OR) = 1.61[1.16, 2.25]), number of oocytes retrieved (mean difference [MD] = 1.05 [0.43, 1.68]), number of mature oocytes retrieved (MD = 0.82 [0. 84, 1.16]), and CPR (OR = 1.48 [1.08, 2.01]). Subgroup analyses revealed that dual trigger was associated with a significantly increased CPR in patients who received fresh ET (OR = 1.68 [1.14, 2.48]). By contrast, the dual trigger was not associated with an increased CPR in the patient group with frozen-thawed ET (OR = 1.15 [0.64, 2.08]).

CONCLUSION

The dual trigger was associated with a significantly higher number of retrieved oocytes, number of mature oocytes, CPR, and LBR in IVF than the hCG trigger. The beneficial effect for fresh ET cycles compared with frozen-thawed ET might be associated with increased endometrial receptivity.

RELEVANCE

After dual trigger, delaying ET due to the concern of endometrial receptivity might not be needed.

Dual trigger with gonadotropin releasing hormone agonist and human chorionic gonadotropin improves live birth rates in POSEIDON group 3 and 4 expected poor responders

OBJECTIVE

Aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of dual triggering with gonadotropin releasing hormone agonist and human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) on outcomes of fresh embryo transfers following gonadotropin antagonist cycles in POSEIDON group 3 and group 4 low prognosis women and to compare the outcomes with hCG-only triggering.

METHODS

This study was conducted by retrospective analysis of patients with expected poor ovarian response (POSEIDON group 3 and 4) that underwent fresh embryo transfers following in-vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles with either dual triggering or hCG-only triggering between January 2010 and April 2020. A total of 1068 women that underwent dual triggering and 1931 that underwent hCG-only triggering were included in the study.

RESULTS

Number of retrieved oocytes, M2 oocytes, oocyte maturation rate, fertilization rate, obtained 2PN embryos, implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rate and live birth delivery rates were found significantly higher in dual-triggering group in comparison to hCG-only group (p < 0.001, p < 0.001, p < 0.001, p < 0.001, p < 0.001, p < 0.001, p = 0.02, p < 0.001 respectively).

CONCLUSION

Dual trigger with concomitant injections of GnRH agonist and hCG in GnRH antagonist cycles appears to improve IVF outcomes, increase quality of embryos, reduce miscarriage rates and consequently increase live birth delivery rates in POSEIDON groups 3/4 poor responders.

Dual trigger with the combination of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist and standard dose of human chorionic gonadotropin improves in vitro fertilisation outcomes in poor ovarian responders

The study aimed to evaluate the impact of the dual trigger with the combination of GnRH agonist and standard dose of recombinant hCG on IVF outcomes in poor ovarian responders with GnRH antagonist protocol. 1283 cycles of 1010 poor responder patients according to Bologna criteria were retrospectively analysed in terms of final oocyte maturation: dual trigger group (250 μg hCG + 0.2 mg triptorelin) or standard group (250 μg hCG). Primary outcome measures were the number of retrieved and mature oocytes. The secondary outcome measures were clinical pregnancy rates and live birth rates.The number of retrieved oocytes, mature oocytes, and the top-quality embryos transferred were significantly higher in the dual trigger group (p < .001). Fertilisation rates (73.6% vs 69.6%, p = .009), implantation rates (18.7% vs 14.6, p = .039), clinical pregnancy rate per embryo transfer (27.5% vs. 19.9%, p = .010) and live birth rate per embryo transfer (21.6% vs. 14.9%, p = .011) were also significantly higher in the dual trigger group as compared to the hCG trigger group. The usage of dual trigger with a GnRH agonist and a standard dosage of hCG could improve clinical pregnancy rates and live birth rates in poor ovarian responders undergoing GnRH antagonist IVF/ICSI cycles.IMPACT STATEMENTWhat is already known on this subject? Dual trigger with standard dose of hCG has been the subject of trials in normal responders to optimise IVF outcomes. The results of these studies showed significant improvements in implantation and pregnancy rates with an increase in the number of mature oocytes retrieved. As a result, dual trigger has become a popular ovulation trigger option in GnRH antagonist cycles.What do the results of this study add? There is limited data about the use of dual trigger in poor ovarian responders (PORs). According to our study, increasing the number of retrieved oocytes, mature oocytes, the number of fertilised oocytes, the number of transferred embryos and top quality embryos transferred by using dual trigger in patients with PORs have a positive impact on pregnancy outcomes.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? These findings implies potential advantages of dual trigger usage for improving IVF outcomes in PORs. With large sample sized prospective randomised trials, dual trigger with combination of GnRHa and a standard dose of hCG might replace the traditional ovulation trigger with hCG in PORs.

Dual trigger protocol is an effective in vitro fertilization strategy in both normal and high responders without compromising pregnancy outcomes in fresh cycles

Objective

To study the birth rates of normal vs. high responders after dual trigger of final oocyte maturation with gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist and human chorionic gonadotropin in fresh in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles in which ovarian stimulation was achieved by a flexible GnRH antagonist protocol.

Design

Retrospective cohort study.

Setting

University hospital.

Patient(s)

In women <35 years of age, 290 fresh IVF cycles using the dual trigger protocol with day 5 embryo transfers from January 2013 to July 2018 were included. Cycles excluded were those with preimplantation genetic testing, gestational carriers, donor oocytes, and fertility preservation.

Intervention(s)

IVF with dual trigger.

Main Outcome Measure(s)

Clinical pregnancy rate, live birth rate.

Result(s)

Comparing normal responders, defined as <30 oocytes retrieved, and high responders, defined as ≥30 oocytes retrieved, the clinical pregnancy rates (67.0% vs. 69.3%, respectively) and live birth rates (60.5% vs. 60.0%, respectively) were not significantly different. No cases of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome were reported in either group.

Conclusion(s)

Ovarian stimulation by a flexible GnRH antagonist protocol followed by dual trigger yields comparable outcomes between normal and high responders in fresh IVF cycles.