Meta-analysis of estradiol for luteal phase support in in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection

Effect of estradiol supplementation on luteal support following a significant reduction in serum estradiol levels after hCG triggering: a prospective randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to evaluate the impact of adding 4 mg estradiol valerate to progesterone for luteal support on pregnancy rates in IVF cycles following a long protocol with reduced luteal serum estradiol levels post-hCG triggering.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

The prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted at a public tertiary hospital reproductive center with 241 patients who experienced a significant decrease in serum estrogen levels post-oocyte retrieval.

INTERVENTIONS

Participants received either a daily 4 mg dose of estradiol valerate in addition to standard progesterone or standard progesterone alone for luteal support.

RESULTS

The ongoing pregnancy rate did not show a significant difference between the E2 group and the control group (56.6% vs. 52.2%, with an absolute rate difference (RD) of 4.4%, 95% CI -0.087 to 0.179, P = 0.262). Similarly, the live birth rate, implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rate, early abortion rate, and severe OHSS rate were comparable between the two groups. Notably, the E2 group had no biochemical miscarriages, contrasting significantly with the control group (0.0% vs. 10.7%, RD -10.7%, 95% CI -0.178 to -0.041, P = 0.000). In the blastocyst stage category, the clinical pregnancy rate was notably higher in the E2 group compared to the control group (75.6% vs. 60.8%, RD 14.9%, 95% CI 0.012 to 0.294, P = 0.016).

CONCLUSION

Adding 4 mg estradiol valerate to progesterone for luteal support does not affect the ongoing pregnancy rate in embryo transfer cycles using a long protocol with a significant decrease in serum estradiol levels after hCG triggering. However, it may reduce biochemical miscarriages and positively impact clinical pregnancy rates in blastocyst embryo transfer cycles.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ChiCTR1800020342.

Peri-implantation estradiol level has no effect on pregnancy outcome in vitro fertilization- embryo transfer

Background

The necessity of monitoring luteal endocrine functions in in vitro fertilization- embryo transfer (IVF-ET) remains uncertain. Specifically, the significance of luteal phase estradiol (E2) levels is a matter of debate in current literature.

Objective

To assess the impact of luteal phase (day 11 after HCG trigger) estradiol levels on IVF-ET outcomes.

Design

Twelve thousand five hundred and thirty-five (n = 12,535) IVF-ET cycles performed in our center between 2015 and 2021 were divided into 5 groups based on the middle and late luteal phase serum E2 (MllPSE2) level percentiles as follows: Group A < 50 pg/mL (N=500), group B 50 pg/mL≤E2<150 pg/mL (N=2545), group C 150 pg/mL≤E2<250 pg/mL (N=1327), group D 250 pg/mL≤E2<500 pg/mL (N=925), group E E2≥500 pg/mL (n=668). The clinical pregnancy rates, abortion rates, and live birth rates of each group were compared. Binary logistic regression analysis was carried out to assess the potential impact of MllPSE2 on the live birth rate (LBR).

Results

No significant differences were found in various parameters when comparing the five groups. The level of MllPSE2 showed no significant difference between the pregnant group and the non-pregnant group. The binary logistic regression analysis model demonstrated that MllPSE2 was not significantly related to LBR.

Conclusion

The influence of E2 during the peri-implantation period (day 11) on clinical outcome in IVF-ET is not affected, even if E2<50 pg/mL. It is speculated that ovarian-derived E2 in MllPSE2 is not deemed necessary for endometrial receptivity. Although caution is warranted due to the retrospective nature of the analysis and the potential for unmeasured confounding, it is argued that the need for luteal E2 monitoring in IVF-ET may be of questionable value.

Estrogen in Luteal Phase Support: Effects on IVF-ICSI Antagonist Protocol Pregnancy Results

Aim: This study aimed to investigate the effect of luteal phase support (LPS) with estradiol in addition to progesterone on pregnancy outcomes in patients who underwent ovulation induction with GnRH antagonist protocol in in vitro fertilization- intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF-ICSI). Materials and Methods: This retrospective study was carried out at reproductive medicine center of Necmettin Erbakan University Meram Medical Faculty. The study enrolled 128 patients undergoing ICSI on an antagonist protocol for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation. Study group administered 7.8 mg transdermal estradiol (E2) daily in addition to progesterone for LPS (n=64). Control group administered only progesterone for LPS (n=64). All women received 200 mg progesterone 3x1 intravaginal daily and 50 mg progesterone intramuscular injection per two days for LPS. Blood samples were drawn 12 days after embryo transfer for β-hCG. If the result is negative, treatment was discontinued, if positive, estradiol was discontinued and progesterone support was continued until the 10th week of gestation. Pregnancy outcomes were the main endpoint. Results: There was no difference between groups in terms of biochemical pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, abortus and ongoing pregnancy rates. Conclusion: In our study, the use of estrogen for luteal phase support in GnRH antagonist protocol did not show any difference on pregnancy outcomes.

Luteal phase support for in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection fresh cycles: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Various luteal phase supports (LPSs) have been proven to increase the pregnancy rate in fresh cycles of in vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection; however, there is still significant debate regarding the optimal use of LPS.

METHODS

A systematic review with the use of a network meta-analysis was performed via electronic searching of Ovid MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov and Google Scholar (up to January 2021) to compare the effectiveness and safety of various LPSs, as well as to evaluate the effects of different initiations of LPSs on pregnancy outcomes. The primary outcomes included live birth and ongoing pregnancy, with the results presented as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).

RESULTS

Eighty-nine randomized controlled trials with 29,625 women comparing 14 interventions or placebo/no LPS treatments were included in the meta-analyses. No significant differences were found in terms of the pregnancy outcomes when LPS was started within 48 h after oocyte retrieval versus a delayed initiation between 48 h and 96 h after oocyte retrieval. The addition of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists to progesterone vaginal pessaries showed a significant benefit in terms of live birth (OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.78). Only human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG) was found to be more efficacious than the placebo/no LPS treatment in terms of live birth (OR 15.43, 95% CI 2.03 to 117.12, low evidence). Any active LPSs (except for rectal or subcutaneous progesterone) was significantly more efficacious than the placebo/no LPS treatment in terms of ongoing pregnancy, with ORs ranging between 1.77 (95% CI 1.08 to 2.90) for the vaginal progesterone pessary and 2.14 (1.23 to 3.70) for the intramuscular progesterone treatment. Among the comparisons of efficacy and tolerability between the active treatments, the differences were small and very uncertain.

CONCLUSION

Delays in progesterone supplementation until 96 h after oocyte retrieval does not affect pregnancy outcomes. The safety of GnRH agonists during the luteal phase needs to be evaluated in future studies before the applications of these agonists in clinical practice. With comparable efficacy and acceptability, there may be several viable clinical options for LPS.

Concordance between systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials in assisted reproduction: an overview

STUDY QUESTION

Are systematic reviews published within a 3-year period on interventions in ART concordant in their conclusions?

SUMMARY ANSWER

The majority of the systematic reviews published within a 3-year period in the field of assisted reproduction on the same topic had discordant conclusions.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses have now replaced individual randomized controlled trials (RCTs) at the top of the evidence pyramid. There has been a proliferation of systematic reviews and meta-analyses, many of which suffer from methodological issues and provide varying conclusions.

STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION

We assessed nine interventions in women undergoing ART with at least three systematic reviews each, published from January 2015 to December 2017.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING METHODS

The systematic reviews which included RCTs were considered eligible for inclusion. The primary outcome was extent of concordance between systematic reviews on the same topic. Secondary outcomes included assessment of quality of systematic reviews, differences in included studies in meta-analyses covering the same search period, selective reporting and reporting the quality of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

Concordant results and conclusions were found in only one topic, with reviews in the remaining eight topics displaying partial discordance. The AMSTAR grading for the majority of the non-Cochrane reviews was critically low whilst it was categorized as high for all of the Cochrane reviews. For three of the nine topics, none of the included systematic reviews assessed the quality of evidence. We were unable to assess selective reporting as most of the reviews did not have a pre-specified published protocol.

LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION

We were limited by the high proportion of reviews lacking a pre-specified protocol, which made it impossible to assess for selective reporting. Furthermore, many reviews did not specify primary and secondary outcomes which made it difficult to assess reporting bias. All the authors of this review were Cochrane review authors which may introduce some assessment bias. The categorization of the review's conclusions as beneficial, harmful or neutral was subjective, depending on the tone and wording of the conclusion section of the review.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

The majority of the systematic reviews published within a 3-year period on the same topic in the field of assisted reproduction revealed discordant conclusions and suffered from serious methodological issues, hindering the process of informed healthcare decision-making.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS

All the authors are Cochrane authors. M.S.K. is an editorial board member of Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility group. No grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors was obtained.

Roles of kisspeptin in IVF/ICSI-treated infertile women and in human granulosa cells

Kisspeptin, a crucial central regulator of reproduction, has been used as a trigger in in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment. This study aimed to investigate the roles of kisspeptin in IVF treatment in infertile females (n = 30); and in steroidogenesis in human granulosa-like tumor cell line (KGN). In the human study, blood was collected at three time points including (1) the beginning of gonadotropin stimulation (Phase I), (2) around eight days after gonadotropin stimulation (Phase II), and (3) on the day of ovum pick-up (Phase III). Follicular fluid (FF) was collected at Phase III. Serum human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) was measured 15 days after embryo transfer and fetal heart beats were determined around 42 days of menstrual cycle to classify the subjects into successful and unsuccessful groups. FF kisspeptin levels were higher in successful compared with unsuccessful subjects (P < 0.01). Kisspeptin levels were significantly higher in FF than in serum in successful subjects (P < 0.05) but were comparable in unsuccessful subjects. Serum kisspeptin was comparable among three phases in the successful group but its levels in Phase III were significantly lower compared with Phase I in the unsuccessful group (P < 0.01). Serum kisspeptin in Phase II/III had positive correlations with serum E2 in Phases II and III and the outcomes of IVF/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) treatment including serum hCG levels. For the cell experiment (n = 3), kisspeptin treatment in the presence of FSH together with IGF-1 enhanced CYP19A1 (aromatase) mRNA expression compared with control. FSH alone increased aromatase concentrations in the supernatant compared with control and kisspeptin at the dose of 10^-2 mmol/L with FSH enhanced aromatase concentrations in the supernatant compared with FSH alone (P < 0.001 all). In conclusion, kisspeptin enhanced aromatase expression and secretion and was associated with positive outcomes of IVF/ICSI treatment. Further studies regarding supplementation of kisspeptin could reveal its beneficial effects on IVF/ICSI treatment.

Is there any correlation between Estradiol supplementation, as luteal phase support, and clinical pregnancy in ART cycles? A cross-sectional study

Background

Endometrial receptivity is one of the important factors in assisted reproductive technology (ART) success. In the luteal phase of an ART cycle, serum estradiol (E2) and progesterone are often placed in low levels. Supporting the luteal phase with progesterone is a usual method.

Objective

To evaluate the effects of E2 supplementation plus progesterone on the luteal phase support in the antagonist protocol who have undergone intracytoplasmic sperm injection-embryo transfer cycles.

Materials and Methods

In this cross-sectional study, 200 patients with antagonist stimulation protocol, who had undergone intracytoplasmic sperm injection treatment, were divided into two groups based on the use of E2 supplementation. In both groups, 400 mg progesterone suppositories (CyclogestⓇ), twice a day/vaginally, was administered starting from the day of oocyte collection until the fetal heart activity. However, in the E2 group, in addition to progesterone, 4 mg tablet of E2 was received daily. Beta hCG was checked 14 days after the embryo transfer, and the clinical pregnancy rate was the main endpoint.

Results

The patients' characteristics were matched, and insignificant differences were observed, except for endometrial thickness. The clinical outcomes showed the rate of pregnancy was higher in the E2 group compared to the control group; nonetheless, statistically, there was no noticeable difference.

Conclusion

E2 supplementation had no beneficial effect in the luteal phase support of IVF cycles. Nevertheless, more studies are required to confirm the supportive role of E2 supplementation for embryo implantation and to improve the outcomes in ART cycles.

Combined use of oestradiol and progesterone to support luteal phase in antagonist intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles of normoresponder women: a case-control study

We evaluated the effect of combined use of oral oestrogen (E2) and vaginal progesterone (P) to support luteal phase in antagonist intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles. We analysed data from 176 patients who underwent ICSI cycles with antagonist protocol. P 90 mg vaginal gel once a day and micronised E2 of 4 mg/day, were started from the day of oocyte pick up and continued to the 12th day of embryo transfer. Group 1 (n = 79) patients received E2 + P for luteal phase support. In group 2 (n = 97) patients, only P 90 mg vaginal gel was used for luteal phase support. There were no significant differences between group 1 and group 2 patients in terms of clinical pregnancy rates (PRs) (26.58% vs. 20.62%, p = .352), early pregnancy loss rates (6.33% vs. 6.19%, p = .969), incidence of luteal vaginal bleeding (8.86% vs. 8.25%, p = .885) and implantation rates (22.8% vs. 16.9%, p = .298). In conclusion, our study showed no beneficial effect of addition of E2 to luteal phase support on clinical PR in antagonist IVF cycles.Impact statementWhat is already known on this subject? Luteal phase deficiency is defined as a disruption in progesterone and oestrogen production after ovulation. It is clear that, luteal phase supplementation to improve the outcomes in in vitro fertilisation (IVF) cycles is mandatory. As an iatrogenic complication of assisted reproductive technique, decreased luteal oestrogen and progesterone levels lead to decreased pregnancy rates (PRs) and implantation rates.What the results of this study add? In this study, we aimed to present the role of luteal phase oestrogen administration in GnRH antagonist cycles. A total of 176 cases received progesterone vaginal gel form for luteal phase support. Study group received 4 mg oral oestradiol hemihydrate in addition to progesterone. Compared to previous studies, our study consisted of larger number of patients and we used oestradiol through oral route. We found out that luteal oestradiol support did not improve the clinical PR.What the implications are of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? Our study showed no beneficial effect of addition of oestradiol to luteal phase support on clinical PR in antagonist IVF cycles.

Evaluation of progestogen supplementation for luteal phase support in fresh in vitro fertilization cycles

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effectiveness of progestogen supplementation in improving clinical pregnancy rates in women undergoing fresh IVF cycles and to compare different routes, start times, durations, and estrogen coadministration regimen.

DESIGN

Comprehensive systematic review and meta-analysis.

SETTING

University.

PATIENT(S)

Women undergoing fresh IVF cycles who did and did not receive progestogen supplementation.

INTERVENTION(S)

Summary odds ratios (ORs) were calculated by binomial logistic regression.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Clinical pregnancy rates.

RESULT(S)

Eighty-two articles (26,726 women) were included. Clinical pregnancy rates were increased by IM (OR = 4.57), vaginal (OR = 3.34), SC (OR = 3.36), or oral (OR = 2.57) progestogen supplementation versus no treatment. The greatest benefit was observed when progestogens were supplemented IM versus vaginally (OR = 1.37). The optimal time to commence administration was between oocyte retrieval and ET (OR = 1.31), with oocyte retrieval +1 day being most beneficial. Coadministration of estrogen had no benefit (OR = 1.33), whether progestogens were coadministered vaginally or IM. Clinical pregnancy rates were equivalent when progestogen supplementation was ceased after ≤3 weeks or continued for up to 12 weeks (OR = 1.06).

CONCLUSION(S)

This broad-ranging meta-analysis highlights the need to reevaluate current clinical practice. The use of progestogens in fresh IVF cycles is substantially beneficial to clinical pregnancy. Critically, the use of IM progestogens should not be dismissed, as it yielded the greatest clinical pregnancy rates. Pregnancy success was impacted by initiation of therapy, with 1 day after oocyte retrieval being optimal. There is little evidence to support coadministration of estrogen or prolonging progestogen treatment beyond 3 weeks.

Luteal oestradiol for patients with serum oestradiol levels lower than expected per oocyte

Although the efficiency of progesterone in providing luteal phase support has been established, the role of oestradiol supplementation during the luteal phase remains controversial. We evaluated pregnancy outcomes of patients who had a ratio of serum E2 levels on the hCG day to the number of oocytes retrieved (oestradiol/oocyte ratio - EOR) levels of <100 pg/ml by supporting them with additional oestradiol during the luteal phase. In total, 150 patients with an EOR < 100 pg/ml of oestradiol undergoing antagonist intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles were randomly assigned into two groups to receive either oral oestradiol (4 mg/d) plus vaginal progesterone (90 mg, 2 × 1/day) (group 1) or vaginal progesterone (90 mg, 2 × 1/d) alone (group 2). Implantation rate following transfer of a single embryo did not differ between the two groups (group 1 = 33.3%; group 2 = 34.9%; p = 0.85). Similarly, both groups gave comparable clinical pregnancy rates per embryo transfer with 31.7% in group 1 compared with 28.6% in group 2 (p = 0.69). In conclusion the study suggests that the addition of 4 mg oral E2 to progesterone does not increase the probability of pregnancy.

Plasmatic estradiol concentration in the mid-luteal phase is a good prognostic factor for clinical and ongoing pregnancies, during stimulated cycles of in vitro fertilization

Objective

To evaluate the predictive efficiency of serum estradiol (E₂) concentration in the mid-luteal phase regarding chemical, clinical, and ongoing pregnancies, in patients subjected to IVF/ICSI with fresh embryo transfer.

Methods

One hundred and forty-three patients undergoing IVF/ICSI met all the inclusion criteria for the present study. Most of the patients used antagonists, final maturation was achieved with recombinant chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG), and embryo transfer took place on days 3 to 5, but mostly on day 4. The luteal phase was supplemented with estradiol valerate 6 mg/day and vaginal micronized progesterone 600 mg/day. There was no exclusion of patients in the embryo transfer group due to age or ovarian reserve. All patients with estradiol and chorionic gonadotrophin (βHCG) dosage on the day of transfer, day 7, were included. We assessed the following variables, initially regarding age: number of eggs collected, formed embryos, embryos transferred, day of transfer, transfer type, estradiol and chorionic gonadotropin. Next, we evaluated these elements at three different ranges of estradiol concentrations (<200 pg/ml, 200-500 pg/ml, and >500 pg/ml), comparing these parameters in pregnant (P) and non-pregnant (NP) patients.

Results

Data analysis by age group in P and NP patients showed significant differences in the mean values of the variables E₂ and βHCG, TD7. Mean serum estradiol levels in P and NP in the three age groups were: <35years, 835/417 p=0.0006, 35-39 years 833/434 p=0.0118, >39 years, 841/394 p=0.0012. There was also a significant difference in pregnancy rates in the group >500 pg/ml of estradiol concentration (63.4%, p=0.0096). The likelihood of chemical and clinical abortions for the estradiol ranges were: 38.46%, involving the two first ranges versus 15.15% for a concentration >500 pg/ml, p=0.0412 and 5.26% for a concentration >900 pg/ml, p=0.0105. The Pearson correlation coefficient for HCG and estradiol was r = 0.5108.

Conclusion

This study showed the prognostic value of E₂ in the mid-luteal phase (TD7) for chemical, clinical, and ongoing pregnancies, and its concentration suggested that there is a moderately positive correlation with βHCG levels.

Outcome of intracytoplasmic sperm injection after preinstillation of a gonadotropin releasing hormone agonist in the uterine cavity just before embryo transfer

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effects of a gonadotropin releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) injection prior to embryo transfer on implantation and pregnancy rate.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of patients undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF) therapy with and without GnRHa preinstallation into the uterine cavity just before embryo transfer between January 2012 and March 2013 in a single IVF center of a university hospital. Patients were evaluated based upon implantation, pregnancy, live birth, and miscarriage rates.

RESULTS

GnRHa was injected into the uterine cavity of 108 patients prior to embryo transfer which were regarded as study group. One thousand forty-seven patients who were not injected GnRHa were regarded as the control group. Pregnancy rates were 44.4% and 41.7% in the GnRHa and control groups, respectively. Live birth rates were 27.8% and 26.1%, miscarriage rates were 15.7% and 15.7%, and implantation rates were 31% and 30%, respectively and there were no difference between groups statistically (p>0.05).

CONCLUSION

No statistically significant differences in implantation, pregnancy, live birth, or miscarriage rates were observed in patients treated with GnRHa prior to embryo transfer, relative to the controls. Therefore, GnRHa injection into the uterine cavity prior to embryo transfer is not recommended as a means of increasing implantation or pregnancy rates in IVF. However, prospective randomized controlled studies are needed to clarify the effect of GnRHa instillation in the uterine cavity for embryo implantation in IVF.

Estradiol use in the luteal phase and its effects on pregnancy rates in IVF cycles with GnRH antagonist: a systematic review

For all the steps of in vitro fertilization to occur successfully, factors such as the quality of retrieved oocytes and endometrial receptivity to the embryo must be ensured. Current studies have shown that endometrial receptivity can be optimized using dedicated exogenous progesterone for luteal phase support in assisted reproduction cycles. But it has not yet been established the benefits of additional use of estradiol in this support. Analyzing pituitary suppression protocols that employ GnRH antagonists, this review will address literature publications between the years 2000-2016, shedding light on this issue to answer questions about the benefits of supplementation.

Does pituitary suppression affect live birth rate in women with congenital hypogonadotrophic hypogonadism undergoing intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection? A multicenter cohort study

In this retrospective multicenter cohort study, women with congenital hypogonadotrophic hypogonadism (CHH) (n = 57) who underwent intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection in-between 2010-2014 were compared to age-matched controls with tubal factor infertility (n = 114) to assess ovarian stimulation cycle and pregnancy outcomes. Live birth rates (LBRs) per started cycle were 31.6 and 24.6% in CHH and controls groups, respectively (p = 0.36). Comparable success rates were also confirmed with the logistic regression analysis (OR: 1.44, 95% CI: 0.78-2.67, p = 0.24). Of the 57 women with CHH, 19 were stimulated with the gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol, 13 with the long-GnRH-agonist protocol. Pituitary suppression (PS) was not employed in the remaining 25 cases. Compared to women with PS, women without PS had significantly higher embryo implantation rates (21.6 versus 52.6%, p = 0.03). Although there was a trend favoring no PS, LBRs (25.0 versus 40.0%, p = 0.26) per cycle were short of statistical significance. LBRs per cycle (57.1 versus 31.2%, p = 0.11) and miscarriage rates (11.1 versus 16.7%, p = 0.75) were similar between CHH women who were given estrogen + progesterone and progesterone alone to support the luteal phase. In conclusion, the optimal stimulation protocol appears to be exogenous gonadotropin stimulation alone, without PS, and progesterone-only luteal phase support in CHH patients.

Mid-luteal estradiol levels of poor/good responders and intracytoplasmic sperm injection

Objective:

To assess mid-luteal estradiol (E2) levels in poor and good responders and determine its effect on the outcome after intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI).

Methods:

The current study was carried out in females who underwent ICSI from June 2011 to September 2013 in “Islamabad Clinic Serving Infertile Couples”. They were categorized into good and poor responders on the basis of female age ≤40 years, basal follicle stimulating hormone ≤12 mIU/ml, and antral follicle count >5, respectively. Their mid-luteal E2 measured on the day of embryo transfer was stratified into groups (A-E) on the basis of 20th, 40th, 60th and 80th percentile values. The outcome was categorized into non-pregnant with beta human chorionic Gonadotrophin (hCG) 5-25 m IU/ml, and clinical pregnancy with beta hCG>25 m IU/ml.

Results:

The conception rate was 12% (63/513) in poor responders and 72% (237/329) in good responders respectively. The mid-luteal E2 levels were higher in conception as compared to non-conception cycles (p<0.001) in good and poor responders.

Conclusion:

Maximum pregnancies in poor and good responders (53% and 98% respectively) with mid-luteal E2 levels above 80^th percentiles confirm the role of the increase in mid-luteal E2 for augmentation in conception rate of females after ICSI.

Effects of Estradiol on the Paracrine Regulator Expression of In Vitro Maturated Murine Ovarian Follicles

The preservation of female germ cells is important in the individuals with ovarian dysfunction and failure. For this purpose, ovarian follicle in vitro maturation (OFIVM) is an important technology for the retrieval of mature oocytes. In the in vivo follicular development, paracrine factors such as angiotensin (AT) and anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) play important roles. We attempted to add estrogen during the OFIVM and to assess their expression on the follicular cells. The ovaries and pre-antral follicles were collected from 13-day C57BL/6 mice and cultured in vitro with estradiol (E2) treatment for up to two weeks. In the whole ovaries, the expression of AT II was decreased and the expression of AMH was similar between control and E2-treated ovaries after in vitro culture. Although there was no difference in the survival, ovulation, maturation and fertilization rates between control and E2-treated groups, the expression of AT II in the follicular cells was down-regulated after E2 treatment at mRNA level, and AMH showed similar expression. In conclusion, adding E2 in OFIVM may regulate paracrine factors and their receptors that are related to follicular development. Further investigations are necessary to elucidate the roles of various sex hormones in the regulation of AT and AMH expression during the OFIVM.