Timing of progesterone luteal support in natural frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles - Back to basics

Progesterone-modified natural cycle preparation for frozen embryo transfer

RESEARCH QUESTION

Is there any difference in clinical outcomes between the progesterone-modified natural cycle (P4mNC) and hormone replacement therapy (HRT) endometrial preparation protocols after single euploid blastocyst frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles?

DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study was performed at a single, private, high-volume fertility centre. Patients who underwent single euploid blastocyst FET between January 2017 and December 2019 were included. A total of 1933 FET cycles were reviewed, and 723 FET cycles from 548 patients met the inclusion criteria. Two groups were compared according to endometrial preparation: 327 P4mNC-FET and 396 HRT-FET cycles. The primary outcome was the live birth rate. The secondary outcomes included the clinical pregnancy rate and the miscarriage rate.

RESULTS

There were no differences in the clinical pregnancy rate (50.2% versus 47.0%, P = 0.688), miscarriage rate (9.8% versus 14.5%, P = 0.115) and live birth rate (45.0% versus 39.6%, P = 0.331) between the P4mNC-FET and HRT-FET groups after covariate adjustments.

CONCLUSIONS

There were no differences in the clinical outcomes between the P4mNC-FET and HRT-FET cycles. These results indicate that P4mNC-FET cycles produce clinical outcomes comparable to those of more traditional HRT-FET while allowing greater flexibility in the timing of embryo transfer.

Association between duration of progesterone supplementation and clinical outcomes in artificial frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles

Objective

The administration of progesterone before transfer in hormone replacement treatment (HRT) is crucial for the clinical outcomes of frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET), but the optimal duration of progesterone remains controversial. This study aimed to investigate the effect of the duration of progesterone administration on the clinical outcomes of FET cycles.

Methods

This prospective cohort study included 353 artificial FET cycles conducted at a reproductive medicine center between April and October 2021. The FET cycles were stratified into four groups based on the duration of progesterone supplementation before the procedure and the embryonic development stage: group P3 (73 patients) received intramuscular progesterone for 3 days and group P4 (87 patients) for 4 days before Day 3 frozen embryo transfer, group P5 (70 patients) for 5 days and group P6 (123 patients) for 6 days before frozen blastocyst transfer. This trial was performed using one or two vitrified embryo(s) when the endometrial thickness reached 7 mm after estrogen supplementation in an artificial cycle. The primary outcome was clinical pregnancy, and secondary outcomes included biochemical pregnancy, implantation, early pregnancy loss, and live births.

Results

There were no significant differences in the demographic and clinical characteristics between the groups. No significant difference was observed in the clinical pregnancy rates between groups: 23/73 (31.5%) in group P3 vs 28/87 (32.2%) in group P4 (P = 0.927). Compared to group P5 (41/70, 58.6%), the clinical pregnancy rate was not significantly different in group P6 (77/123, 62.6%, P = 0.753). There was no significant difference in the implantation rates between groups: 33/136 (24.3%) in group P3 vs 34/166 (20.5%) in group P4 (P = 0.431), and 62/133 (46.6%) in group P5 vs 107/231 (46.3%) in group P6 (P = 0.956). The duration of progesterone supplementation (mean: 3.5 ± 0.5 days; range:3-4 days) before Day 3 frozen embryo transfer did not impact clinical pregnancy (odds ratio [OR] 1.048; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.518-2.119). The duration of progesterone administration (mean: 5.6 ± 0.5 days; range:5-6 days) before frozen blastocyst transfer may not affect clinical pregnancy (OR 1.339; 95% CI, 0.717-2.497).

Conclusion

There may be no significant correlation between the duration of progesterone supplementation and pregnancy outcomes in artificial FET cycles, although the clinical pregnancy rate was higher when progesterone supplementation was extended for one day before FET.

Preparation of the endometrium for frozen embryo transfer: an update on clinical practices

Over the past decade, the application of frozen-thawed embryo transfer treatment cycles has increased substantially. Hormone replacement therapy and the natural cycle are two popular methods for preparing the endometrium. Hormone replacement therapy is now used at the discretion of the doctors because it is easy to coordinate the timing of embryo thawing and transfer with the schedules of the in-vitro fertilization lab, the treating doctors, and the patient. However, current results suggest that establishing a pregnancy in the absence of a corpus luteum as a result of anovulation may pose significant maternal and fetal risks. Therefore, a 'back to nature' approach that advocates an expanded use of natural cycle FET in ovulatory women has been suggested. Currently, there is increasing interest in how the method of endometrial preparation may influence frozen embryo transfer outcomes specifically, especially when it comes to details such as different types of ovulation monitoring and different luteal support in natural cycles, and the ideal exogenous hormone administration route as well as the endocrine monitoring in hormone replacement cycles. In addition to improving implantation rates and ensuring the safety of the fetus, addressing these points will allow for individualized endometrial preparation, also as few cycles as possible would be canceled.

Premature timing of progesterone luteal phase support initiation did not negatively impact live birth rates in modified natural frozen thawed embryo transfer cycles

Study question

In a modified natural cycle frozen-thawed embryo transfer (mNC-FET), does the premature timing of progesterone luteal phase support (LPS) initiation 24 h following human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) trigger impact live birth?

Summary answer

Premature LPS initiation did not negatively affect the live birth rate (LBR) in mNC-FET cycles compared with conventional LPS initiation 48 h after hCG triggering.

What is known already

During natural cycle FET, human chorionic gonadotropin is routinely used to mimic endogenous luteinizing hormone (LH) surge to induce ovulation, which allows more flexibility in embryo transfer scheduling, thus relieving the burden of multiple visits by patients and laboratory workloads, which is also known as mNC-FET. Moreover, recent data demonstrates that ovulatory women undergoing natural cycle FETs have a lower risk of maternal and fetal complications due to the essential role of the corpus luteum in implantation, placentation and pregnancy maintenance. While several studies have confirmed the positive effects of LPS in mNC-FETs, the timing of progesterone LPS initiation is still unclear, as compared with fresh cycles where robust research has been conducted. To the best of our knowledge, no clinical studies comparing different beginning days in mNC-FET cycles have been published.

Study design size duration

This retrospective cohort study involved 756 mNC-FET cycles performed at a university-affiliated reproductive center between January 2019 and August 2021. The primary outcome measured was the LBR.

Participants/materials setting methods

Ovulatory women ≤42 years of age who were referred for their autologous mNC-FET cycles were included in the study. According to the timing of progesterone LPS initiation following the hCG trigger, patients were assigned into two categories: premature LPS group (progesterone initiation 24 h after hCG trigger, n = 182) versus conventional LPS group (progesterone initiation 48 h after hCG trigger, n = 574). Multivariate logistic regression analysis was used to control for confounding variables.

Main results and the role of chance

There were no differences in background characteristics between the two study groups, except for the proportion of assisted hatching (53.8% in premature LPS group versus 42.3% in conventional LPS group, p = 0.007). In the premature LPS group, 56 of 182 patients (30.8%) had a live birth, compared to 179 of 574 patients (31.2%) in the conventional LPS group, with no significant difference observed between groups (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 0.98, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.67-1.43, p = 0.913). In addition, there was no significant difference between the two groups in other secondary outcomes. A sensitivity analysis for LBR according to the serum LH and progesterone levels on hCG trigger day also confirmed the aforementioned findings.

Limitations reasons for caution

In this study, retrospective analysis was conducted in a single center and was therefore prone to bias. Additionally, we did not anticipate monitoring the patient's follicle rupture and ovulation after hCG triggering. Future prospective clinical trials remain necessary to confirm our results.

Wider implications of the findings

While exogenous progesterone LPS was added 24 h after hCG triggering, embryo-endometrium synchrony would not be adversely affected so long as sufficient time was allowed for endometrial exposure to exogenous progesterone. Our data support promising clinical outcomes following this event. As a result of our findings, clinicians and patients will be able to make better informed decisions.

Study funding/competing interests

No specific funding was available for this study. The authors have no personal conflicting interests to declare.

Trial registration number

N/A.

The effect of progesterone supplementation for luteal phase support in natural cycle frozen embryo transfer: a systematic review and meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials

IMPORTANCE

The necessity of progesterone supplementation for luteal phase support (LPS) in natural cycle frozen embryo transfer (NC-FET) cycles warrants further confirmation.

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effect of progesterone supplementation for LPS on the reproductive outcomes of patients undergoing NC-FET cycles.

DATA SOURCES

The PubMed, Ovid-Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, CNKI, Wanfang, VIP, and CBM were electronically searched. The search time frame was from inception up to September 2022.

STUDY SELECTION AND SYNTHESIS

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that used progesterone for LPS in NC-FET cycles, including true NC-FET cycles (tNC-FET) and modified NC-FET cycles (mNC-FET), were included. The counted data were analyzed using relative risk (RR) as the effect-size statistic, and each effect size was assigned its 95% confidence interval (CI).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcomes were the live birth rate (LBR) and the clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), and the secondary outcome was the miscarriage rate.

RESULTS

Four RCTs were included, which involved 1116 participants. The results of the meta-analysis showed that progesterone supplementation was associated with increased LBR (RR, 1.42; 95% CI, 1.15-1.75; I² = 0%, moderate-quality evidence) and CPR (RR, 1.30, 95% CI, 1.07-1.57; I² = 0%, moderate-quality evidence) in patients undergoing NC-FET cycles. Subgroup analysis showed that progesterone supplementation was associated with higher LBR and CPR in tNC-FET cycles. However, no association was found between increased LBR and CPR in mNC-FET cycles. In addition, only one RCT reported that oral dydrogesterone had similar CPR and miscarriage rate compared with vaginal progesterone in mNC-FET cycles.

CONCLUSION(S)

Overall, moderate-quality evidence suggested that progesterone supplementation for LPS was associated with increased LBR and CPR in NC-FET cycles. Progesterone supplementation was associated with a higher LBR and CPR in tNC-FET cycles. However, the effectiveness of progesterone supplementation in mNC-FET cycles should be further verified by larger RCTs. Low to very low-quality evidence indicated that oral dydrogesterone and vaginal progesterone have similar reproductive outcomes in mNC-FET cycles, which requires further study, especially in tNC-FET cycles.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

PROSPERO CRD42022355550 (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=355550) was registered on September 3, 2022.

Progesterone: The Key Factor of the Beginning of Life

Progesterone is the ovarian steroid produced by the granulosa cells of follicles after the LH peak at mid-cycle. Its role is to sustain embryo endometrial implantation and ongoing pregnancy. Other biological effects of progesterone may exert a protective function in supporting pregnancy up to birth. Luteal phase support (LPS) with progesterone is the standard of care for assisted reproductive technology. Progesterone vaginal administration is currently the most widely used treatment for LPS. Physicians and patients have been reluctant to change an administration route that has proven to be effective. However, some questions remain open, namely the need for LPS in fresh and frozen embryo transfer, the route of administration, the optimal duration of LPS, dosage, and the benefit of combination therapies. The aim of this review is to provide an overview of the uterine and extra-uterine effects of progesterone that may play a role in embryo implantation and pregnancy, and to discuss the advantages of the use of progesterone for LPS in the context of Good Medical Practice.