Intranasal gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) for luteal-phase support following GnRHa triggering, a novel approach to avoid ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome in high responders

Interventions to prevent or reduce the incidence and severity of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome: a systematic umbrella review of the best clinical evidence

Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) is a potentially life-threating iatrogenic complication of the early luteal phase and/or early pregnancy after in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment. The aim of the current study was to identify the most effective methods for preventing of and reducing the incidence and severity of OHSS in IVF patients. A systematic review of systematic reviews of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) with meta-analysis was used to assess each potential intervention (PROSPERO website, CRD 268626) and only studies with the highest quality were included in the qualitative analysis. Primary outcomes included prevention and reduction of OHSS incidence and severity. Secondary outcomes were maternal death, incidence of hospital admission, days of hospitalization, and reproductive outcomes, such as incidence of live-births, clinical pregnancies, pregnancy rate, ongoing pregnancy, miscarriages, and oocytes retrieved. A total of specific interventions related to OHSS were analyzed in 28 systematic reviews of RCTs with meta-analyses. The quality assessment of the included studies was high, moderate, and low for 23, 2, and 3 studies, respectively. The certainty of evidence (CoE) for interventions was reported for 37 specific situations/populations and resulted high, moderate, and low-to-very low for one, 5, and 26 cases, respectively, while it was not reported in 5 cases. Considering the effective interventions without deleterious reproductive effects, GnRH-ant co-treatment (36 RCTs; OR 0.61, 95% C 0.51 to 0.72, n = 7,944; I2 = 31%) and GnRH agonist triggering (8 RCTs; OR 0.15, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.47, n = 989; I2 = 42%) emerged as the most effective interventions for preventing OHSS with a moderate CoE, even though elective embryo cryopreservation exhibited a low CoE. Furthermore, the use of mild ovarian stimulation (9 RCTs; RR 0.26, CI 0.14 to 0.49, n = 1,925; I2 = 0%), and dopaminergic agonists (10 RCTs; OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.23 to 0.44, n = 1,202; I2 = 13%) coadministration proved effective and safe with a moderate CoE. In conclusion, the current study demonstrates that only a few interventions currently can be considered effective to reduce the incidence of OHSS and its severity with high/moderate CoE despite the numerous published studies on the topic. Further well-designed RCTs are needed, particularly for GnRH-a down-regulated IVF cycles.

GnRHa trigger-the story of the ugly duckling

The objective of this invited review is to describe the introduction and development of the GnRH agonist (GnRHa) trigger protocol in modern in vitro fertilization, focusing on ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) prevention and, equally important on the role of GnRHa trigger as an opener of the luteal phase "black box." The GnRHa trigger and freezing of all embryos is the ultimate weapon against OHSS in the OHSS-risk patient. In the non OHSS-risk patient, GnRHa trigger followed by a modified luteal phase support with lutein hormone activity and subsequent fresh embryo transfer results in excellent reproductive outcomes. Thus, the GnRHa trigger has paved the way for a virtually OHSS-free clinic, and equally important is the fact that the early lessons learned from studying the GnRHa trigger opened the "black box" of the luteal phase enabling improved reproductive outcomes in both fresh and frozen embryo transfer cycles.

Comparison of pregnancy rates in antagonist cycles after luteal support with GnRH-agonist versus progesterone: prospective randomized study

PURPOSE

To compare pregnancy rates in GnRH-antagonist cycles triggered with hCG after luteal phase support with intranasal GnRH-agonist as sole luteal phase support versus standard vaginal progesterone preparation.

METHODS

Prospective randomized controlled study of patients who underwent antagonist-based IVF cycles triggered with hCG at university-affiliated tertiary medical center between 2020 and 2022. Patients meeting the inclusion criteria were randomly assigned to either intranasal GnRH-agonist or vaginal progesterone for luteal phase support. Pregnancy rates were the main outcome compared between the two study groups.

RESULTS

A total of 150 patients underwent 164 cycles, 127 cycles of which were included in the study cohort. Of them, 64 (50.4%) and 63 (49.6%) cycles were treated with GnRH-agonist or progesterone, respectively, as sole luteal phase support. A significantly higher pregnancy rate was demonstrated in the GnRH-agonist group compared with the progesterone group. After adjustment of several potential confounders such as age, body mass index, past obstetric history, number of IVF cycles, oocyte retrieved and embryos transferred, GnRH-agonist was still associated with a higher pregnancy rate (odds ratio 3.4, 95% confidence interval 1.4-8.3). Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome rates were similar between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This prospective study suggests that nasal GnRH-agonist for luteal phase support is associated with higher pregnancy rates compared with standard progesterone support in an antagonist-based protocol triggered with hCG, while maintaining a similar safety profile.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT05484193. Date of registration: August 02 2022. The trial was retrospectively registered.

Dydrogesterone supplementation in addition to routine micronized progesterone administration for luteal support in cycles triggered with lone GnRH agonist results in an acceptable pregnancy rate and avoids the need to freeze embryos

BACKGROUND

Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) is reduced when using antagonist cycle with gonadotrophin releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist trigger before ovum pick up. This trigger induces short luteinizing hormone (LH) and follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) peaks, resulting in an inadequate luteal phase and a reduced implantation rate. We assessed whether the luteal phase can be rescued by supplementing with oral dydrogesterone (duphaston) in antagonist cycles after a lone GnRH agonist trigger.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort study. The study group (N.=123) included women who underwent IVF. Patients received a GnRH-antagonist with a lone GnRH-agonist trigger due to imminent OHSS. The control group (N.=374) included patients who underwent a standard antagonist protocol with a dual trigger of a GnRH-agonist and human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG). All the patients were treated with micronized progesterone (utrogestan) for luteal phase support. Study patients were given duphaston in addition.

RESULTS

The fertilization rate was comparable between the two groups. The mean number of embryos transferred, the clinical pregnancy rate and the take-home baby rate were comparable between groups (1.5±0.6 vs. 1.5±0.5 and 46.3% vs. 41.2%, and 66.7% vs. 87.7%, respectively). No OHSS event was reported in either group.

CONCLUSIONS

This study was the first to evaluate outcomes of duphaston supplementation for luteal support in an antagonist cycle with lone GnRH agonist trigger. The functionality of the luteal phase of those cycles could be restored by adding duphaston. This approach was found to be safe and prevented the need to postpone embryo transfer in case of pending OHSS.

GnRH agonist as a luteal support in IVF cycle: mini-review—is there a role?

Background

It has been established that assisted reproductive technology (ART) cycles are usually accompanied by a defective luteal phase, and that luteal phase support (LPS) is mandatory to improve reproductive outcomes. This review aims to summarize the hypothesis, safety and current evidence about GnRH agonist as a luteal phase support in ART.

Main body

There are many regimens of luteal phase support to improve ART outcomes in women undergoing fresh and thawed cycles. Luteal phase support drugs include progesterone, human chorionic gonadotropin, gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist, estradiol, and recombinant luteinizing hormone. There is some debate about optimal drugs and timing for start of LPS in ART cycles.

Conclusion

Although most centers support luteal phase by vaginal progesterone, GnRH agonist is a debatable drug for luteal support cycles.

Single-Dose Versus Multiple-Dose GnRH Agonist for Luteal-Phase Support in Women Undergoing IVF/ICSI Cycles: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

Although gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist has been introduced as a beneficial luteal phase support (LPS), the optimal strategy of GnRH agonist remains unclear. This network meta-analysis was therefore performed to determine the comparative efficacy and safety of multiple-dose versus single-dose GnRH agonist protocol for LPS in patients undergoing IVF/ICSI cycles.

METHODS

We searched relevant studies in PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Registry of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) from their inception util to September 2021. Live birth, clinical pregnancy rate, multiple pregnancy rate, and clinical abortion rate was evaluated. Pairwise and network meta-analysis were conducted using RevMan and ADDIS based on random-effects model, respectively. Moreover, the prioritization of protocols based on ranking probabilities for different outcomes were performed.

RESULTS

Sixteen RCTs met our eligibility criteria. Pairwise meta-analysis showed that multiple-dose protocol of GnRH agonist was effective for increasing live birth rate (OR 1.80, 95% CI 1.15 to 2.83, p=0.01) and clinical pregnancy rate (OR 1.89, 95% CI 1.01 to 3.56, p=0.05) as well as decreasing clinical abortion rate (OR 0.55, 95% CI 0.34 to 0.90, p=0.02). Meanwhile, single-dose protocol of GnRH agonist was effective for increasing clinical pregnancy rate (OR 1.45, 95% CI 1.11 to 1.89, p=0.007) and multiple pregnancy rate (OR 2.55, 95% CI 1.12 to 5.78, p=0.03). However, network meta-analysis only confirmed that multiple-dose protocol of GnRH agonist was the best efficacious strategy for live birth rate (OR 2.04, 95% CrI 1.19 to 3.93) and clinical pregnancy rate (OR 2.10, 95% CrI 1.26 to 3.54).

CONCLUSION

Based on the results of NMA, multiple-dose protocol may be the optimal strategy for patients undergoing IVF/ICSI cycles owing to its advantage in increasing live birth and clinical pregnancy rate. Moreover, single-dose protocol may be the optimal strategy for improving multiple pregnancy rate. However, with the limitations, more RCTs are required to confirm our findings.

Co-administration of GnRH agonists with vaginal progesterone compared to vaginal progesterone in luteal phase support of the frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycle: An RCT

BACKGROUND

Since progesterone alone does not seem to be enough for luteal phase support (LPS), especially in frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles, so gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) is suggested as an adjuvant therapy in combination with progesterone for LPS.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effects of the administration of GnRH-a with vaginal progesterone compared to vaginal progesterone alone in luteal phase support of the frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this randomized controlled clinical trial, 240 infertile women who were candidates for FET were evaluated into two groups (n = 120/each). Group I received 400 mg vaginal progesterone twice a day from the time of transfer. The second group received vaginal progesterone and also 0.1 mg diphereline on days 0, 3, and 6 of FET for LPS. Finally, the clinical and ongoing pregnancy rates, and the implantation, and spontaneous abortion rates were compared in two groups.

RESULTS

Results showed that there was no significant difference between the mean age of women and the duration of infertility (p = 0.78, p = 0.58, respectively). There were no significant differences between groups in the terms of implantation and spontaneous abortion rates (p = 0.19, p = 0.31, respectively). However, in terms of clinical and ongoing pregnancy rates, the significant differences were seen between groups (p = 0.008 and p = 0.005, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Co-administration of GnRH-a and vaginal progesterone in LPS may be superior to vaginal progesterone alone in women who underwent a frozen-selected embryo transfer cycle.

Time, time, time: see what governs the luteal phase endocrinology

Two modes of ovulation trigger are used in IVF: hCG, acting on ovarian LH receptors, and GnRH agonist, eliciting pituitary LH and FSH surges. These two modes are evaluated herein, focusing on how they serve specific time-sensitive events crucial for achieving embryo implantation and pregnancy. hCG trigger is associated with significant timing deviation from physiology. Peak progesterone is not synchronized with implantation window; progesterone level does not rise continuously to a mid-luteal peak, but rather drops from a too early peak. The luteal phase endocrinology post GnRH agonist trigger is characterized by a quick and irreversible luteolysis. Therefore, freeze all strategy is advised, if there is a risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. If fresh transfer is desired, numerous approaches for luteal phase support have been suggested. However, a thorough understanding of time-sensitive events suggests that a single 1,500 IU hCG dose, administered 48 h post oocyte retrieval, is all that is needed to fully support the luteal phase and secure best chances of achieving pregnancy.

Efficacy of daily GnRH agonist for luteal phase support following GnRH agonist triggered ICSI cycles versus conventional strategy: A Randomized controlled trial

Objective:

The use of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) as an alternative for human chronic gonadotropin (hCG) trigger has potential benefits, but the optimal luteal phase support (LPS) following GnRHa trigger remains to be elucidated. We aimed to investigate a new strategy (daily GnRH agonist for LPS following GnRH agonist trigger) as an alternative for the conventional approach to the patients undergoing intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI).

Methods:

In this randomized controlled trial study, 44 ICSI patients were randomly assigned into two groups: group 1, patients received standard strategy (hCG trigger [10000 IU] and progesterone bid [400 mg/BD] for LPS); group 2, patients received a dose of GnRHa (0.2 mg) for ovulation trigger and subcutaneous injection of GnRHa bid (0.2 mg) for LPS.

Results:

The pregnancy, miscarriage, and live birth rates for the patients undergoing LPS following the GnRHa trigger were similar to those of patients undergoing the standard strategy.

Conclusions:

We showed that a daily subcutaneous injection of GnRHa for LPS following the GnRHa trigger can be successfully performed as an alternative to the standard strategy, with comparable pregnancy and live birth rates in ICSI patients.

IVF and the exogenous progesterone-free luteal phase

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

In a conventional IVF cycle, final oocyte maturation and ovulation is triggered with a bolus of hCG, followed by progesterone-based luteal support that spans several weeks if pregnancy is achieved. This article summarizes several approaches of the exogenous progesterone-free luteal support in IVF.

RECENT FINDINGS

Triggering ovulation with GnRH agonist may serve as an alternative to hCG, with well established advantages. In addition, the luteal phase can be individualized in order to achieve a more physiologic hormonal milieu, and a more patient friendly treatment, alleviating the burden of a lengthy exogenous progesterone therapy.

SUMMARY

GnRH agonist trigger followed by a 'freeze all' policy is undoubtedly the best approach towards the 'OHSS-free clinic'. If fresh embryo transfer is considered well tolerated after GnRH agonist trigger, rescue of the corpora lutea by LH activity supplementation is mandatory. Herein we discuss the different approaches of corpus luteum rescue.

The freeze-all strategy versus agonist triggering with low-dose hCG for luteal phase support in IVF/ICSI for high responders: a randomized controlled trial

STUDY QUESTION

Does the freeze-all strategy in high-responders increase pregnancy rates and improve safety outcomes when compared with GnRH agonist triggering followed by low-dose hCG intensified luteal support with a fresh embryo transfer?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Pregnancy rates after either fresh embryo transfer with intensified luteal phase support using low-dose hCG or the freeze-all strategy did not vary significantly; however, moderate-to-severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) occurred more frequently in the women who attempted a fresh embryo transfer.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Two strategies following GnRH agonist triggering (the freeze-all approach and a fresh embryo transfer attempt using a low-dose of hCG for intensified luteal phase support) are safer alternatives when compared with conventional hCG triggering with similar pregnancy outcomes. However, these two strategies have never been compared head-to-head in an unrestricted predicted hyper-responder population.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

This study included women with an excessive response to ovarian stimulation (≥18 follicles measuring ≥11 mm) undergoing IVF/ICSI in a GnRH antagonist suppressed cycle between 2014 and 2017. Our primary outcome was clinical pregnancy at 7 weeks after the first embryo transfer. Secondary outcomes included live birth and the development of moderate-to-severe OHSS.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Following GnRH agonist triggering, women were randomized either to cryopreserve all good-quality embryos followed by a frozen embryo transfer in an subsequent artificial cycle or to perform a fresh embryo transfer with intensified luteal phase support (1500 IU hCG on the day of oocyte retrieval, plus oral estradiol 2 mg two times a day, plus 200 mg of micronized vaginal progesterone three times a day).

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

A total of 212 patients (106 in each arm) were recruited in the study, with three patients (one in the fresh embryo transfer group and two in the freeze-all group) later withdrawing their consent to participate in the study. One patient in the freeze-all group became pregnant naturally (clinical pregnancy diagnosed 38 days after randomization) prior to the first frozen embryo transfer. The study arms did not vary significantly in terms of the number of oocytes retrieved and embryos produced/transferred. The intention to treat clinical pregnancy and live birth rates (with the latter excluding four cases lost to follow-up: one in the fresh transfer and three in the freeze-all arms, respectively) after the first embryo transfer did not vary significantly among the fresh embryo transfer and freeze-all study arms: 51/105 (48.6%) versus 57/104 (54.8%) and 41/104 (39.4%) versus 42/101 (41.6%), respectively (relative risk for clinical pregnancy 1.13, 95% CI 0.87-1.47; P = 0.41). However, moderate-to-severe OHSS occurred solely in the group that received low-dose hCG (9/105, 8.6%, 95% CI 3.2% to 13.9% vs 0/104, 95% CI 0 to 3.7, P < 0.01).

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

The sample size calculation was based on a 19% absolute difference in terms of clinical pregnancy rates, therefore smaller differences, as observed in the trial, cannot be reliably excluded as non-significant.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

This study offers the first comparative analysis of two common strategies applied to women performing IVF/ICSI with a high risk to develop OHSS. While pregnancy rates did not vary significantly, a fresh embryo transfer with intensified luteal phase support may still not avoid the risk of moderate-to-severe OHSS and serious consideration should be made before recommending it as a routine first-line treatment. Future trials may allow us to confirm these findings.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose. No external funding was obtained for this study.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02148393.

TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE

28 May 2014.

DATE OF FIRST PATIENT’S ENROLMENT

30 May 2014.

The early luteal hormonal profile in IVF patients triggered with hCG

STUDY QUESTION

What is the early luteal phase hormonal profile in patients undergoing ovarian stimulation for IVF/ICSI followed by hCG trigger and a freeze-all strategy without luteal phase support?

SUMMARY ANSWER

The peak concentration of progesterone occurred 4 days after oocyte pick-up (OPU + 4), with an average 35% fall from OPU + 4 to OPU + 6, and progesterone levels before and 12 h after hCG administration predicted levels during the early luteal phase.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

The luteal phase during IVF differs from that during normal cycles, particularly with respect to the serum progesterone level profile. This can cause asynchrony between the embryo and the endometrium, potentially resulting in implantation failure and poor reproductive outcomes.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

This prospective study included 161 women with normal ovarian reserve receiving GnRH antagonist co-treatment during ovarian stimulation with FSH who were followed up to 6 days after OPU in a single IVF cycle.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Women aged 18-42 years undergoing IVF with ovarian stimulation using FSH were included. Ovulation was triggered with recombinant hCG 250 μg. Hormone levels were determined from blood samples taken on the day of trigger, before hCG, at 12, 24 and 36 h after hCG and at 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6 days after OPU. The primary endpoint was early luteal phase serum concentrations of progesterone, LH, estradiol and hCG.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

One outlier with a pre-hCG serum progesterone level of 11.42 ng/mL was excluded, so all analyses included 160 subjects. Progesterone levels began to increase 1 day after OPU, peaked 4 days after OPU (114 ng/mL), then declined from OPU + 5 onwards. Peak progesterone levels were at OPU + 4, OPU + 5 or OPU + 6 in 38.8, 29.4 and 13.8% of patients, respectively. Approximately two-thirds of patients had a fall in serum progesterone from OPU + 4 to OPU + 6. Pre-hCG progesterone levels correlated significantly with those at 24 h after hCG (r2 = 0.28; P < 0.001), which in turn correlated significantly with progesterone at OPU + 4 (r2 = 0.32; P < 0.001). LH peaked (4.4 IU/L) 12 h after hCG trigger, persisting for 24 h but was barely elevated compared with physiological levels. Serum estradiol peaked twice: at 24 h post-trigger and at OPU + 4. Highest hCG levels (130 mIU/mL) occurred at 24 h post-injection. The best correlations between the number of follicles ≥11 mm and serum progesterone level were seen at 24 and 36 h after hCG and OPU + 1.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

The influence of different profiles of serum progesterone on reproductive outcomes could not be determined because a freeze-all strategy was used in all patients. In addition, data were not available to relate serum hormone level findings with endometrial histology or endometrial receptivity analysis to clearly identify the relationship between serum hormones and the window of implantation.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Detailed information about early luteal phase hormone levels could be used to optimize and individualize luteal phase support to improve reproductive outcomes.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

This study was funded by My Duc Hospital, Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam. All authors state that they have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT02798146; NCT03174691.

Multiple-dose versus single-dose gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist after first in vitro fertilization failure associated with luteal phase deficiency: A randomized controlled trial

Objective

To evaluate the efficacy and safety of multiple- versus single-dose gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) addition to luteal phase support (LPS), in patients with a first in vitro fertilization (IVF) failure associated with luteal phase deficiency (LPD).

Methods

Eighty patients with a first IVF failure associated with LPD were randomly assigned into single-dose and multiple-dose GnRH-a groups. In the second IVF attempt, patients in the single-dose group were given standard LPS plus a single dose of GnRH-a 6 days after oocyte retrieval. Patients in the multiple-dose group received standard LPS plus 14 daily injections of GnRH-a. Children conceived were followed up for 2 years.

Results

Pregnancy (67.5% vs. 42.5%), clinical pregnancy (50.0% vs. 22.5%), and live birth rates (42.5% vs. 20.0%) were significantly higher in the multiple-dose versus single-dose GnRH-a group. Patients in the multiple-dose GnRH-a group had significantly higher progesterone levels 14 days after oocyte recovery (35.9 vs. 21.4 ng/mL). No significant difference existed in the status at birth or developmental and behavior assessments of 2-year-old children conceived in both groups.

Conclusions

Daily addition of GnRH-a to standard LPS can achieve better pregnancy outcomes with a sustained safety profile in patients with a first IVF failure associated with LPD.

Suboptimal response to GnRH agonist trigger: causes and practical management

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

GnRH agonist products are used extensively worldwide to trigger ovulation and final oocyte maturation in in vitro fertilization cycles. The purpose of this article is to outline possible causes for a suboptimal response to the GnRH agonist trigger.

RECENT FINDINGS

Risk factors for such a suboptimal response include prolonged hormonal contraceptive use, previous GnRHa-induced pituitary downregulation, a hypogonadotropic/hypogonadal condition, patient error, environmental conditions that may damage the GnRHa product used, GnRH and luteinizing hormone (LH) receptors polymorphisms, low baseline LH and low endogenous serum LH levels on trigger day as well as low BMI. The induction of an adequate LH surge can be ascertained by an LH urine test 12 h post trigger.

SUMMARY

In most cases, GnRHa trigger elicits effective LH+follicle stimulating hormone surges, resulting in mature, fertilizable oocytes. Clinical awareness to conditions that may predispose to a suboptimal response to the GnRHa trigger may prevent failed oocyte retrial.

Luteal Phase in Assisted Reproductive Technology

Luteal phase (LP) is the period of time beginning shortly after ovulation and ending either with luteolysis, shortly before menstrual bleeding, or with the establishment of pregnancy. During the LP, the corpus luteum (CL) secretes progesterone and some other hormones that are essential to prepare the uterus for implantation and further development of the embryo, the function known as uterine receptivity. LP deficiency (LPD) can occur when the secretory activity of the CL is deficient, but also in cases of normal CL function, where it is caused by a defective endometrial response to normal levels of progesterone. LPD is particularly frequent in treatments using assisted reproductive technology (ART). Controlled ovarian stimulation usually aims to obtain the highest number possible of good-quality oocytes and requires the use of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogs, to prevent premature ovulation, as well as an ovulation trigger to achieve timed final oocyte maturation. Altogether, these treatments suppress pituitary secretion of luteinizing hormone (LH), required for the formation and early activity of the CL. In addition to problems of endometrial receptivity for embryos, LPD also leads to dysfunction of the local uterine immune system, with an increased risk of embryo rejection, abnormally high uterine contractility, and restriction of uterine blood flow. There are two alternatives of LPD prevention: a direct administration of exogenous progesterone to restore the physiological progesterone serum concentration independently of the CL function, on the one hand, and treatments aimed to stimulate the CL activity so as to increase endogenous progesterone production, on the other hand. In case of pregnancy, some kind of LP support is often needed until the luteal-placental shift occurs. If LPD is caused by defective response of the endometrium and uterine immune cells to normal concentrations of progesterone, a still poorly defined condition, symptomatic treatments are the only available solution currently available.

How frequent is severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome after GnRH agonist triggering in high-risk women? A systematic review and meta-analysis

The aim of the present systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the incidence of severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) after triggering of final oocyte maturation with gonadotrophin releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) in high-risk women. The pooled incidence of severe OHSS in high-risk women who did not receive any form of luteal phase support was 0% (95% CI 0.0 to 0.0, I² = 0%, random-effects model, 14 data sets, 983 women). The pooled incidence of severe OHSS in high-risk women in whom HCG was added to standard luteal phase support was 1% (95% CI 0.0 to 2.0, I² = 27.02%, random-effects model, 10 data sets, 707 women). The incidence of severe OHSS in high-risk women triggered by a combination of GnRHa and HCG (dual triggering), who received standard luteal phase support, was 1% (95% CI 0.0 to 3.0, one study, 182 women). The incidence of severe OHSS in high-risk women, is not eliminated when HCG is administered either concomitantly with GnRHa (dual triggering), during the luteal phase after GnRHa triggering, or both. On the contrary, it is eliminated when no luteal support is administered.

GnRH agonist triggering followed by 1500 IU of HCG 48 h after oocyte retrieval for luteal phase support

RESEARCH QUESTION

Gonadotrophin releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist trigger after GnRH antagonist-based ovarian stimulation protocol for IVF is gaining popularity, because it prevents ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome and allows for near physiological LH and FSH surges. A small dose of HCG (1500 IU) on the day of oocyte retrieval, followed by daily progesterone administration, is currently the preferred way to secure adequate luteal support after GnRH agonist trigger. In the present study, the possibility that a bolus of 1500 IU HCG, given 2 days after oocyte retrieval, may be sufficient to sustain adequate luteal support without additional progesterone treatment was questioned.

DESIGN

A non-interventional retrospective cohort study between conducted between April 2017 and August 2018. A total of 154 consecutive patients treated with GnRH agonist trigger followed by day-2 HCG (1500 IU) support only (study group) were included. Data were compared with 155 consecutive patients who were treated with HCG (6500 IU) trigger followed by conventional progesterone luteal support (control group).

RESULTS

Pregnancy, miscarriage and live birth rates were comparable between the study and control groups. In patients who became pregnant, mean oestradiol level 14 days after oocyte retrieval was 4719 pmol/l and 2672 pmol/l in the study and control group, respectively (P < 0.001), reflecting robust luteal activity in the study group.

CONCLUSIONS

A bolus of 1500 IU HCG, administered 2 days after retrieval, can provide excellent luteal support, without the need for further progesterone supplementation.

GnRHa for trigger and luteal phase support in natural cycle frozen embryo transfer - A proof of concept study

We aimed to explore whether ovulation induced by a GnRH analogue (GnRHa), followed by daily GnRHa luteal support provides an efficient platform for natural cycle frozen embryo transfer (NC-FET). In this cohort study, included were normo-ovulatory women who underwent NC-FET cycles, under the age of 40, with an antral follicle count > eight. Ovulation was triggered with triptorelin (0.2 mg Decapeptyl; Ferring), and luteal support was initiated two days later, using a Nafarelin inhaler (Synarel, Pfizer), 200 μg twice daily. Main outcome measures were luteal estradiol and progesterone levels (three to five days following ovulation), implantation rate, ongoing pregnancy rate, early pregnancy loss rate, and live birth rate. Fifty-one patients treated between 2017 and 2018 were included. Mid luteal progesterone levels among study patients, were non-significantly different between patients who achieved pregnancy and those who did not, but differed significantly on day 14 following ovulation (86.0 ± 31.3 vs. 9.8 ± 9.5 nmol/L, respectively, p < 0.001). Twenty-three patients achieved a clinical pregnancy (45.1 %); interestingly, there were no chemical pregnancies. Three pregnancies ended in an early abortion at 6-7 weeks gestation, and 20 pregnancies continued as ongoing pregnancies (39.2 %). One patient had a late abortion at 16 weeks gestation, and 14 had a live birth. In conclusion, in this proof of concept study, inducing ovulation with a bolus of GnRHa in NC-FET, followed by repeated daily GnRHa administration, resulted in satisfactory luteal phase steroid levels and high ongoing pregnancy and live birth rates.

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist for ovulation trigger - OHSS prevention and use of modified luteal phase support for fresh embryo transfer

The introduction of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) trigger greatly impacted modern IVF treatment. Patients at low risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) development, undergoing fresh embryo transfer and GnRHa trigger can be offered a virtually OHSS-free treatment with non-inferior reproductive outcomes by using a modified luteal phase support in terms of small boluses of human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG), daily recombinant luteinizing hormone LH (rLH) or GnRHa. In the OHSS risk patient, GnRHa trigger can safely be performed, followed by a 'freeze-all' policy with a minimal risk of OHSS development and high live birth rates in the subsequent frozen embryo transfer cycle. Importantly, GnRHa trigger opened the 'black box' of the luteal phase, promoting research in the most optimal steroid levels during the luteal phase. GnRHa trigger allows high-dose gonadotropin stimulation to achieve the optimal number of oocytes and embryos needed to ensure the highest chance of live birth. This review thoroughly discusses how the GnRHa trigger concept adds safety and efficacy to modern IVF in terms of OHSS prevention. Furthermore, the optimal luteal phase management after GnRHa trigger in fresh embryo transfer cycles is discussed.

GnRH agonists to sustain the luteal phase in antagonist IVF cycles: a randomized prospective trial

BACKGROUND

The addition of a GnRH analogue to the luteal phase in in vitro fertilization programs has been seldom proposed due to the presence of GnRH receptors in the endometrium. The aim of the study was to evaluate the effect of triptorelin addition in short antagonist cycles, compared to cycles where the only supplementation was progesterone.

METHODS

The primary objective of this study was the study of the effect of Triptorelin addiction during the luteal phase on the live birth rate. Secondary objectives of efficacy were pregnancy rates and implantation rates, as well as safety in terms of OHSS risks. The study was a prospective, randomized, open study, performed in two independent Centers from July 2013 to October 2015. Patients were divided into three groups: a) Regular antagonist protocol, with only luteal progesterone; b) Antagonist protocol with luteal triptorelin as multiple injections, c) Antagonist protocol with luteal triptorelin as single bolus. Descriptive statistics were obtained for all the parameters. Mean and standard deviation were used for all quantitative parameters. Differences between percentages were studied using Chi-square test generalized to the comparison of several proportions.

RESULTS

A total number of 1344 patients completed the study, 786 under the age of 35 years, and 558 over 35 years. It was observed an increase of positive HCG results, Clinical pregnancy rates and Delivery rates when triptorelin was added in the luteal phase, irrespective whether as a single bolus or five injections. This increase was statistically significant both for pregnancy rates and delivery rates. The statistic difference between pregnancies and deliveries obtained with or without luteal triptorelin reached p < 0,01. No increase of OHSS risk was observed.

CONCLUSIONS

From this large study it appears that the concept of luteal phase supplementation should be revisited. From our study it appears that triptorelin addition to the luteal phase of antagonist cycles, either as a single bolus or using multiple injections, is a good tool to optimize ART results.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Provincia di Bergamo (n 1203/2013).

Luteal phase support with GnRH agonist does not eliminate the risk for ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome

This study aims to report a case of early, severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) following GnRH agonist trigger for final oocyte maturation despite luteal support with a GnRH agonist. Contrary to the claim that luteal support using a GnRH agonist eliminates the risk for OHSS in high-risk patients, this report alerts practitioners to the risk of severe OHSS development despite GnRH agonist luteal support in patients receiving GnRH antagonist protocol with GnRH agonist triggering and cautions the practitioners to consider other measures of OHSS prevention.

Ovarian manipulation in ART: going beyond physiological standards to provide best clinical outcomes

Current knowledge on ovarian physiology has challenged the traditional concept of folliculogenesis, creating the basis for novel ovarian stimulation protocols in assisted reproduction technology. The purpose of this review was to evaluate the efficacy of novel clinical interventions that could aid clinicians in individualizing their protocols to patients' characteristics and personal situations. We conducted a literature review of the available evidence on new approaches for ovarian stimulation from both retrospective and prospective studies in the PubMed database. Here, we present some of the most important interventions, including follicle growth in the gonadotropin-independent and dependent stage, manipulation of estradiol production throughout ovarian stimulation, control of mid-cycle gonadotropin surges, and luteal phase support after different stimulation protocols and trigger agents. The latest research on IVF has moved physicians away from the classical physiology, allowing the development of new strategies to decouple organ functions from the female reproductive system and challenging the traditional concept of IVF.

Individual luteolysis pattern after GnRH-agonist trigger for final oocyte maturation

Final oocyte maturation using GnRH-agonist trigger in a GnRH-antagonist protocol is increasingly common, as ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome is almost completely avoided. However, this approach might lead to reduced pregnancy rates due to severe luteolysis. This proof of concept study evaluated the extend of luteolysis by measuring progesterone levels 48 hours after oocyte retrieval in 51 patients, who received GnRH-agonist trigger for final oocyte maturation in a GnRH-antagonist protocol due to the risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. It was shown, that luteolysis after GnRHa-trigger differs greatly among patients, with progesterone levels ranging from 13.0 ng/ml to ≥ 60.0 ng/ml, 48 hours after oocyte retrieval. Significant positive correlations could be demonstrated between progesterone levels and the number of ovarian stimulation and suppression days (p = 0.006 and p = 0.002 respectively), the total amount of medication used for ovarian suppression (p = 0.015), the level of progesterone on the day of final oocyte maturation (p = 0.008) and the number of retrieved oocytes (p = 0.019). Therefore it was concluded, that luteolysis after GnRH-agonist trigger is patient-specific and also luteal phase support requires individualization. Longer stimulation duration as well as a higher level of progesterone on the day of final oocyte maturation and more retrieved oocytes will result in higher levels of progesterone 48 hours after oocyte retrieval.