Pretreatment with a long-acting GnRH agonist for frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles: how to improve live birth?

BACKGROUND

Whether pretreatment with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) can improve the pregnancy outcomes in frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) cycles is controversial. The inconsistencies in the results of different studies would be related to the characteristics of the included patients and the protocol of GnRHa use. In this study, we investigated the efficacy of pretreatment with a long-acting GnRH agonist in the early follicular phase of FET cycles and determined which population was suitable for the protocol.

RESULTS

We retrospectively included 630 and 1141 patients in the GnRHa FET and hormone replacement treatment (HRT) FET without GnRHa groups respectively, between October 2017 and March 2019 at a university-affiliated in vitro fertilization center. On the second or third day of menstruation, 3.75 mg of leuprorelin was administered. After 14 days, HRT was initiated for endometrial preparation. No significant differences were observed between the two groups in terms of patient characteristics. However, the GnRHa FET group showed a higher percentage of endometrium with a triple line pattern (94.8% vs 89.6%, p < 0.001) on the day of progesterone administration, with increased implantation (35.6% vs 29.8%, p = 0.005), clinical pregnancy (49.8% vs 43.3%, p = 0.008), and live birth rate (39.4% vs 33.7%, p = 0.016), than the HRT FET cycles with similar endometrial thickness, ectopic pregnancy and early miscarriage rates. Binary logistic regression analysis showed the GnRHa FET group to be associated with an increased chance of clinical pregnancy (P=0.028, odds ratio [OR] 1.32, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.03-1.70) and live birth (P=0.013, odds ratio [OR] 1.34, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06-1.70) compared to the HRT FET without GnRHa group. After subgroup analysis, we found that the GnRHa FET group showed a significantly higher live birth rate in the subgroups of age < 40 years, primary infertility, with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS), and irregular menstruation.

CONCLUSIONS

Pretreatment with a long-acting GnRHa during the early follicular phase improved the live birth rate in FET cycles. Age < 40 years, primary infertility, PCOS, and irregular menstruation are effective indications for endometrial preparation with GnRHa pretreatment in FET cycles. However, further randomized controlled trials are required to verify these results.

Additional single dose GnRH agonist during luteal phase support may improve live birth rate in GnRHa-HRT frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycle: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

GnRH agonist (GnRHa) has been reported to have direct effects and functional roles in the endometrium and embryos. Several meta-analyses have shown that GnRHa administration in the luteal phase improved the live birth rate or pregnancy rate in both fresh and frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles. The aim of this study was to investigate whether luteal GnRHa administration could also improve in vitro fertilization (IVF) outcomes in patients undergoing hormone replacement therapy (HRT) cycles with GnRHa suppression.

METHODS

The retrospective cohort study included a total of 350 patients undergoing GnRHa-HRT FET cycles. The study group included 179 patients receiving an additional single dose of GnRHa in the luteal phase following embryo transfer. A total of 171 patients in the control group did not receive luteal GnRHa. The baseline and cycle characteristics and reproductive outcomes were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

Baseline and cycle characteristics were similar between the two groups, except lower AMH levels were found in the luteal GnRHa group than in the control group. The luteal GnRHa group had a significantly higher ongoing pregnancy rate and live birth rate than the control group. The multivariate analysis revealed that luteal GnRHa administration was positively associated with ongoing pregnancy (OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.20-3.47, P = 0.008) and live birth (OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.20-3.45, P = 0.009). When the subgroup of patients with recurrent implantation failure was analyzed, the multivariate analysis also showed that luteal GnRHa administration had beneficial effects on ongoing pregnancy (OR 4.55, 95% CI 1.69-12.30, P = 0.003) and live birth (OR 4.30, 95% CI 1.59-11.65, P = 0.004).

CONCLUSIONS

Our data suggest that the addition of one luteal dose of GnRHa may improve the live birth rate in patients undergoing the GnRHa-HRT protocol.

Nucleation status of Day 2 pre-implantation embryos, acquired by time-lapse imaging during IVF, is associated with live birth

The primary purpose of this time-lapse data analysis was to identify the association between the nucleation status of a Day 2 preimplantation embryo and live births following in vitro fertilization (IVF). The retrospective data analysis was based on 2769 transferred embryos from 1966 treatment cycles and utilised only Known Implantation Data (KID) for live births. Nucleation errors (NE) such as micronucleation, binucleation, multinucleation and minor error groups, were annotated in the time-lapse images which were taken every 15 minutes for a minimum of 44 hours post insemination. Further, factors that may impact NE and the relationship of early morphological attributes and morphokinetic variables with NE occurrence were explored. The frequency of NE among the transferred embryos was 23.8%. The reversibility of NE evidenced by their presence at the two-cell stage, but absence at the four-cell stage was 89.6%. Embryos exhibiting nucleation errors at the two-cell stage had significantly lower live birth rates compared to embryos with no nucleation errors, constituting a significant predictor. A Generalized Additive Mixed Model was used to control for confounders and for controlling clustering effects from dual embryo transfers. Increased incidences of NE were observed with increasing age, with delayed occurrence of cell divisions and in oocytes inseminated with surgically retrieved spermatozoa. NE assessment and their impact on live birth provides valuable markers for early preimplantation embryo selection. In addition, the high incidence of reversibility of NE and their possible impact on live birth suggest that incorporating two-cell nuclear status annotations in embryo selection, alongside morphology and morphokinetics, is of value.

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-administered GnRH agonist as luteal phase support in insemination cycles: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To find out whether a single-administered GnRH agonist improves the live birth rate in real-life patients undergoing intrauterine insemination (IUI) cycles.

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective, randomized controlled trial in a public single tertiary center in Tampere University Hospital, Finland. Altogether 251 IUI cycles in 163 patients were randomized to triptorelin and a control group between January 2017 and April 2019. In the triptorelin group, the participants had a single administration of a subcutaneous GnRH agonist triptorelin 0.1 mg at the time of implantation. In the control group, there was no luteal phase support. The primary outcome measure was the live birth rate (LBR). The secondary outcome measures were clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) and miscarriage rate.

RESULTS

Overall, the live birth rate was lower in the triptorelin group compared to the control group (7.9 vs. 12.1%; p = .297). The clinical pregnancy rates were 12.6 and 13.7%, respectively. There were 2.4% miscarriages in the triptorelin group and no miscarriages in the control group. Ovarian stimulation with letrozole was associated with lower LBR among the triptorelin group, in comparison to the control group (0 vs. 14.7%, p = .020). In contrast, when gonadotrophin was added to the letrozole, LBR was almost doubled compared to the control group (15.9 vs. 8.3%, p = .341).

CONCLUSION

A single administration of GnRH agonist in the luteal phase does not improve LBR in IUI 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.

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.

Effects of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) as luteal phase support in intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles: a randomized controlled trial

Background

This paper describes a blind randomized controlled trial (RCT) designed to evaluate the effect of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) administration on outcomes of intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) in subjects stimulated with the gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol. A total of 268 women who underwent ICSI cycles with GnRH antagonist ovarian stimulation protocol were included in the study. Patients were randomly assigned to the intervention (GnRH-a) and control groups. The intervention group received a single dose injection of triptorelin (0.1 mg) subcutaneously 6 days after oocyte retrieval while the control group received placebo. The rates of chemical and clinical pregnancy were defined as the primary outcome values.

Results

Two hundred forty participants accomplished the study, and their data were analyzed. No significant difference was detected between the chemical pregnancy rates of the intervention and control groups. However, the clinical pregnancy rate was significantly higher in the GnRH-a group than in the placebo group.

Conclusions

The findings of the present study suggest that the GnRH-a support in the luteal phase can result in a significant improvement of pregnancy rates in ICSI cycles following the ovarian stimulation with GnRH antagonist protocol.

Administration effects of single-dose GnRH agonist for luteal support in females undertaking IVF/ICSI cycles: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

The aim of the present meta-analysis was to evaluate the effects of the addition of single-dose gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) for luteal support on pregnancy outcomes in females partaking in in vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles. In total, the studies were hand-searched from six electronic databases to compare the pregnancy outcomes between single-dose GnRHa administered as luteal phase support (GnRHa group) and regular luteal support (control group). In the GnRHa group, single-dose GnRH agonist were administered at 5/6 days after IVF/ICSI procedures. In the control group, single-dose GnRH agonist was not added during luteal phase support. Only randomized controlled trials were included. Sensitivity analysis was performed using Revman 5.3 software; the high heterogeneity identified in the present analysis was primarily caused by one study included. Following exclusion of this particular study, the meta-analysis results indicated significantly higher rates of ongoing pregnancy or live birth per transfer (P=0.002), clinical pregnancy per transfer (CPR; P=0.001) and multiple pregnancy per pregnancy (P=0.020) in the GnRHa group compared with those in the control group. Meta-analysis of a subgroup of trials with long-acting GnRH-a ovarian treatment protocols indicated that the rate of ongoing pregnancy or live birth (P=0.080), CPR (P=0.090) and multiple pregnancy per pregnancy (P=0.140) were not significantly different between the two groups. However, the results from trials that had used a multi-dose GnRH antagonist ovarian treatment protocol indicated a significantly higher ongoing pregnancy or live birth rate per transfer (P=0.010), CPR per transfer (P<0.0001) and multiple pregnancy rate per pregnancy (P=0.003) compared with those in the control group. The present results suggested that administration of single-dose GnRH agonist in the luteal phase may be an ideal choice for patients undergoing IVF/ICSI therapy.

The addition of single dose GnRH agonist to luteal phase support in artificial cycle frozen embryo transfer: a randomized clinical trial

This prospective randomized clinical trial (RCT) was to evaluate the effect of single-dose gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) in artificial cycle frozen-embryo transfer (AC-FET). A total of 868 FET cycles were included and randomized into two groups: Group A (n = 434) received GnRHa 0.1 mg subcutaneous injection on day 3 after embryo transfer (ET); Group B (n = 434) did not receive GnRHa. The demographic characteristics, primary endpoint (implantation rate) and secondary endpoints (chemical pregnancy rate, clinical pregnancy rate, ongoing pregnancy rate) were compared between two groups and subgroups (aged <35 years and 35-37 years). There were no significant differences in terms of the rates of implantation, clinical pregnancy, ongoing pregnancy, and miscarriage between two groups. While, the subgroups analysis showed the implantation rate was significantly increased in advanced age women (35-37 years) in GnRHa group compared with control group (45.3% vs. 27.8%, p = .03). In conclusion, single dose of GnRHa (0.1 mg triptorelin acetate) supplementation 3 days after ET in AC-FET cycles did not show significant benefit on pregnancy outcomes as a whole. However, in ageing women subgroup, the implantation rate was increasing by adding up GnRHa in peri-implantation periods, and this tendency needs to be further demonstrated by RCT with larger sample size.

Clinical pregnancy following GnRH agonist administration in the luteal phase of fresh or frozen assisted reproductive technology (ART) cycles: Systematic review and meta-analysis

Objective(s)

To study if the GnRH agonist administration in luteal phase improves clinical pregnancy rate of fresh and frozen embryo transfer. Also, this meta-analysis compares the treatment effect of luteal GnRH agonist administration between long agonist and antagonist protocols of fresh cycles, and between two types of treatment: fresh and frozen embryo transfers.

Study design

Systematic review and meta-analysis (registration number CRD42017059152)

Results

For the overall 20 studies (5497 patients), clinical pregnancy rate significantly increased in group of GnRH agonist administration compared to control group (RR 1.24, 95% CI 1.14–1.34, p < 0.0001). Regarding the treatment effect of luteal GnRH agonist administration between long agonist and antagonist protocol fresh cycles, no significant difference was observed (RR = 1.28, 95% CI 0.98–1.67, p = 0.07). Also, in comparison between fresh and frozen embryo transfer, similar effect of GnRH agonist administration was found (RR = 0.93, 95% CI 0.74–1.16, p = 0.49).

Conclusion(s)

There is evidence that GnRH agonist administration in luteal phase improve clinical pregnancy rate in both fresh and frozen cycles. Within fresh cycles, no significant difference of clinical pregnancy rate is found between two protocols. In frozen cycles, the effect of GnRH agonist administration in enhancing clinical pregnancy rate is similar to fresh cycles.

Analysis of two different luteal phase support regimes and evaluation of in vitro fertilization-intra cytoplasmic sperm injection outcomes

Objective:

To evaluate clinical pregnancy rates, miscarriage rates, ongoing pregnancy rates, and in vitro fertilization-intra cytoplasmic sperm injection outcomes of gonadotropin releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) administration compared with human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) application for luteal phase support.

Materials and Methods:

A total of 456 patients were included in the study. The patients were divided into two groups according to luteal phase support type: in group 1 (n=158), single-dose triptorelin acetate 0.1 mg was given on the sixth day after the oocyte pick-up (OPU). In group 2 (n=298), hCG 1500 IU was given on day 4, 7 and 10 after the OPU.

Results:

Both groups were homogeneous in relation with age and antral follicle count. The number of stimulation days and endometrial thickness on hCG day (mm) were found to be significantly higher in group 2 than in group 1 (p<0.001). The clinical pregnancy rate was slightly higher in the GnRHa group, but this difference was not statistically significant.

Conclusion:

Although there was no statistically significant difference between the two groups, luteal phase support with single-dose GnRHa might be as efficient as three doses of hCG. Large prospective, randomized-controlled studies are required comparing GnRHa and hCG for luteal phase support.

Efficacy and Safety of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) Agonists Triptorelin Acetate and Cetrorelix Acetate in Assisted Reproduction

Background

The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of 2 GnRH agonists – triptorelin acetate and cetrorelix acetate – in assisted reproduction.

Material/Methods

A total of 182 females who received in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF+ET) from March 2014 to July 2014 were involved, and their clinical data were retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 91 patients received treatment with short-acting triptorelin (group A) and another 91 patients were treated with cetrorelix acetate (group B). Fasting blood was extracted from each patient on the day of administration of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG), and serum levels of luteinizing hormone (LH), estradiol (E2), and progesterone (P) were detected using chemiluminescence method. The number of oocytes, fertilization rate, cleavage rate, and number of obtained embryos were recorded and compared. Pregnancy outcomes and adverse events were observed and compared. Expression level of FSH receptor (FSHR) in endometrial tissues was measured by qRT-PCR.

Results

Serum level of E2 was significantly lower in group B than in group A (p<0.05). Indices, including the number of oocytes, fertilization rate and cleavage rate, number of obtained embryos, and pregnancy rate, were slightly better in group B than in group A, but no significant differences were found. The incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) was significant higher in group A than in group B (p<0.05). FSHR expression level was significantly lower in group B than in group A.

Conclusions

The effect of cetrorelix acetate is superior to that of short-acting triptorelin in assisted reproduction. Our most important finding is that cetrorelix acetate reduced the incidence of OHSS.

Early stop of progesterone supplementation after confirmation of pregnancy in IVF/ICSI fresh embryo transfer cycles of poor responders does not affect pregnancy outcome

Previous studies indicated that progesterone can be withdrawn at the time of the first positive β-hCG test without compromising the clinical pregnancy outcome in normal ovarian responder. However, the effect of early stop of progesterone supplementation for patients with poor ovarian response (POR) has not been investigated. This study retrospectively collected data from patients with POR in 156 IVF/ICSI fresh embryo transfer (ET) cycles in single tertiary center from January 2010 to June 2016. All the patients met ESHRE consensus, the Bologna criteria, of POR and had hCG injection for luteal phase support (LPS) on day 2, 5 and 8 after ovum pick-up. The pregnant patients were divided into two groups: early stop group represented those who stopped LPS from day of positive pregnancy test; control group represented those who kept progesterone supplementation till gestational age of 9 weeks. There were no significant differences in age, BMI, parity, hormone data, number of follicles>10(mm), endometrial thickness and number of embryos transferred between the two groups. After adjustment for possible confounders with multivariate logistic regression analysis, the clinical pregnancy rates (55.0% vs. 57.1%, P = 0.35), ongoing pregnancy rates (47.0% vs. 46.4%, P = 0.66), miscarriage rates (34.0% vs. 26.7%, P = 0.66) and live-birth rates (44.0% vs. 46.4%, P = 0.41) were not statistically different between early stop group and the control group. Our study indicates that early stop of progesterone supplementation on the day of positive pregnancy test for patients of POR using hCG as LPS in fresh ET cycles does not affect pregnancy outcome.

Mid-luteal phase gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist support in frozen-thawed embryo transfers during artificial cycles: A prospective interventional pilot study

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effect of an additional single mid-luteal dose of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) on pregnancy and perinatal outcomes in hormonally substituted frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles.

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective interventional pilot study. Women scheduled for FET were randomly selected to receive standard hormonal replacement therapy (HRT) for endometrial preparation or HRT with a single additional subcutaneous dose of 0.1mg triptorelin at the time of implantation. If FET was not followed by a pregnancy, women with surplus embryos were scheduled for a single second attempt in a crossover setting. Altogether, 144 FET cycles were analyzed. The carryover effect was tested using a logistic regression model. Logistic regression analysis for binary variables was applied with generalized estimation equation extension to account for dependence among repeated treatments.

RESULTS

The live birth rate (LBR) was 9.8 percentage points higher and the miscarriage rate 14.7 percentage points lower in the intervention group (n=72) than in the control group (n=72), but the differences did not reach statistical significance. Implantation and clinical pregnancy rates were comparable between the groups. No congenital malformations or differences in the median birth weight of newborns were detected.

CONCLUSIONS

Observable but statistically insignificant difference in LBR and miscarriage rate favoring luteal phase GnRHa support was detected. Further, no malformations or effect on fetal growth were observed. Larger studies are needed to confirm the results of this pilot study.

Impact of Mid-Luteal Phase GnRH Agonist Administration on Reproductive Outcomes in GnRH Agonist-Triggered Cycles: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

To explore whether the addition of a mid-luteal bolus of GnRH agonist (GnRHa) improves the implantation rate (IR) in in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles.

DESIGN

A randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

Private IVF center.

PATIENTS

328 IVF/intracytoplasmic sperm injection patients were triggered with GnRHa and received 1,500 IU HCG on the day of oocyte pick-up (OPU) in addition to a standard luteal phase support (LPS).

INTERVENTIONS

In addition, the study group received a bolus of GnRHa 6 days after OPU, whereas the control group did not.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Implantation rate.

SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Ongoing pregnancy (OP) and live birth (LB) rates.

RESULTS

Although serum concentrations of FSH, LH, E2, and P on day OPU + 7 were significantly higher in the study group compared to the control group, the IR was not statistically different between the treatment group (27%) and the control group (23%) [odds ratio (OR) 1.2 (95% CI 0.9-1.7), P < 0.27]. Similarly, the OP rate was 37% in the treatment group and 31% in the control group [OR 1.3 (95% CI 0.8-2.0), P < 0.23]. The LB rate was 36% in the treatment group and 31% in the control group [OR: 1.3 (95% CI 0.8-2.0), P < 0.27].

CONCLUSION

Although a trend toward a higher IR and pregnancy rate was observed in the treatment group, this difference was not statistically significant. However, the absolute risk difference of 5% found for LB is clinically relevant, warranting further investigation.

NCT

02053779.

Direct aspiration versus follicular flushing in poor responders undergoing intracytoplasmic sperm injection: a randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare follicle flushing three times with direct follicular aspiration in poor responders. Our hypothesis was that follicle flushing three times in poor responders would result in similar oocyte yield compared with direct aspiration in poor responders.

DESIGN

A randomised controlled trial performed between January 2015 and June 2015.

SETTING

University hospital.

POPULATION OR SAMPLE

Eighty eligible poor responders, who were defined as having five or fewer follicles ≥13 mm in average diameter with at least two follicles having maximum diameters >17 mm on the day of human chorionic gonadotrophin administration. Monofollicular cycles, including natural cycles, were excluded from the current trial.

METHODS

In the double-lumen needle group, oocyte retrieval was performed by flushing three times with 2 ml in each follicle and in the single-lumen group direct follicle aspiration was performed.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Number of metaphase II oocytes retrieved.

RESULTS

The mean number of metaphase II oocytes was similar in both groups (1.9 ± 0.1 versus 2.1 ± 0.1, respectively). The clinical pregnancy and live birth rates were similar in both groups (32.5% versus 25% and 25% versus 22.5%, respectively). The only significant difference between the two groups was the duration of oocyte retrieval (178.4 ± 13.4 versus 236.3 ± 24.1 seconds, respectively, P = 0.01).

CONCLUSION

Follicular flushing is time consuming and has similar results compared with direct follicle aspiration in poor responders.

TWEETABLE ABSTRACT

Direct follicle aspiration versus flushing in poor responders yields similar metaphase II oocytes.

Effects and safety of GnRH-a as a luteal support in women undertaking assisted reproductive technology procedures: follow-up results for pregnancy, delivery, and neonates

PURPOSE

To investigate the effects and safety of gonadotropin releasing hormone analogue (GnRH-a) as an addition to progesterone luteal support in women who underwent in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection-embryo transfer (IVF/ICSI-ET) and achieved a clinical pregnancy.

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was conducted on 214 patients who underwent IVF/ICSI-ET procedures with standard long mid-luteal protocol, of which 123 received GnRH-a-free protocol and 91 received GnRH-a-added protocol. The patients' pregnancy and delivery course, and their neonates' status at birth and growth/development after birth were statistically compared.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference between both study groups regarding embryo risks and maternal complications during early pregnancy. as well as fetal risks during the middle and late stages and neonate risks during birth, except that the twin pregnancies of the GnRH-a-added group had a considerably greater male/female ratio, and a significantly higher rate of premature delivery and low birth weight than those of the GnRH-a-free group. In addition, there was no significant difference in neonate risks within 2 years after birth between both cohorts.

CONCLUSION

With precautions taken to control the number of implanted embryos and reduce the incidence of twinning pregnancy, the addition of GnRH-a to luteal support is relatively safe and effective.

Impact of Mid-Luteal Phase GnRH Agonist Administration on Reproductive Outcomes in GnRH Agonist-Triggered Cycles: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

To explore whether the addition of a mid-luteal bolus of GnRH agonist (GnRHa) improves the implantation rate (IR) in in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles.

DESIGN

A randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

Private IVF center.

PATIENTS

328 IVF/intracytoplasmic sperm injection patients were triggered with GnRHa and received 1,500 IU HCG on the day of oocyte pick-up (OPU) in addition to a standard luteal phase support (LPS).

INTERVENTIONS

In addition, the study group received a bolus of GnRHa 6 days after OPU, whereas the control group did not.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Implantation rate.

SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

Ongoing pregnancy (OP) and live birth (LB) rates.

RESULTS

Although serum concentrations of FSH, LH, E2, and P on day OPU + 7 were significantly higher in the study group compared to the control group, the IR was not statistically different between the treatment group (27%) and the control group (23%) [odds ratio (OR) 1.2 (95% CI 0.9-1.7), P < 0.27]. Similarly, the OP rate was 37% in the treatment group and 31% in the control group [OR 1.3 (95% CI 0.8-2.0), P < 0.23]. The LB rate was 36% in the treatment group and 31% in the control group [OR: 1.3 (95% CI 0.8-2.0), P < 0.27].

CONCLUSION

Although a trend toward a higher IR and pregnancy rate was observed in the treatment group, this difference was not statistically significant. However, the absolute risk difference of 5% found for LB is clinically relevant, warranting further investigation.

NCT

02053779.

Effect of mid-luteal phase GnRH agonist on frozen-thawed embryo transfers during natural menstrual cycles: a randomised clinical pilot study

This prospective randomised crossover study evaluated the effect of mid-luteal single-dose gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (triptoreline) on pregnancy outcomes in natural-cycle frozen embryo transfers (FETs). Ninety-eight women were randomised to receive either standard luteal support with vaginal micronised progesterone or an additional single dose of 0.1 mg triptoreline at the time of implantation. The intervention group was composed of 65 FET cycles and the control group of 62 cycles. In the intervention group, there were more positive pregnancy tests, clinical pregnancies and live births, but the differences did not reach statistical significance. The mean beta human chorionic gonadotropin (β-hCG) concentration of singleton pregnancies was significantly lower in the intervention group compared to the control group (p = 0.048). No difference was detected in the median birth weight of the newborns.

GnRH agonist during luteal phase in women undergoing assisted reproductive techniques: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

To identify, evaluate and summarize the available evidence regarding the effectiveness and safety of administering a gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist during the luteal phase in women undergoing assisted reproductive techniques.

METHODS

In this systematic review and meta-analysis, we searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the addition of a GnRH agonist during the luteal phase, compared with standard luteal-phase support. We searched seven electronic databases and hand-searched the reference lists of included studies and related reviews. Our primary outcome was live birth or ongoing pregnancy per randomized woman. Our secondary outcomes were clinical pregnancy per randomized woman, miscarriage per clinical pregnancy, adverse perinatal outcome and congenital malformations.

RESULTS

The evidence from eight studies examining 2776 women showed a relative risk (RR) for live birth or ongoing pregnancy of 1.26 (95% CI, 1.04-1.53; I(2) = 58%). Sensitivity analysis when excluding the studies that did not report live birth and those at high risk of bias resulted in one study examining 181 women with an RR of 1.07 (95% CI, 0.73-1.58). Subgroup analysis separating the studies by single/multiple doses of GnRH agonists or by ovarian stimulation with GnRH agonist/antagonist was unable to explain the observed heterogeneity. The quality of the evidence was deemed to be very low: it was downgraded because of the limitation of the included studies, imprecision, inconsistency across the studies' results, and suspicion of publication bias. None of the included studies reported adverse perinatal outcomes or congenital malformations.

CONCLUSIONS

There is evidence that adding GnRH agonist during the luteal phase improves the likelihood of ongoing pregnancy. However, this evidence is of very low quality and there is no evidence for adverse perinatal outcome and congenital malformations. We therefore believe that including this intervention in clinical practice would be premature.

GnRH and GnRH receptors in the pathophysiology of the human female reproductive system

BACKGROUND

Human reproduction depends on an intact hypothalamic-pituitary-gonadal (HPG) axis. Hypothalamic gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) has been recognized, since its identification in 1971, as the central regulator of the production and release of the pituitary gonadotrophins that, in turn, regulate the gonadal functions and the production of sex steroids. The characteristic peculiar development, distribution and episodic activity of GnRH-producing neurons have solicited an interdisciplinary interest on the etiopathogenesis of several reproductive diseases. The more recent identification of a GnRH/GnRH receptor (GnRHR) system in both the human endometrium and ovary has widened the spectrum of action of the peptide and of its analogues beyond its hypothalamic function.

METHODS

An analysis of research and review articles published in international journals until June 2015 has been carried out to comprehensively summarize both the well established and the most recent knowledge on the physiopathology of the GnRH system in the central and peripheral control of female reproductive functions and diseases.

RESULTS

This review focuses on the role of GnRH neurons in the control of the reproductive axis. New knowledge is accumulating on the genetic programme that drives GnRH neuron development to ameliorate the diagnosis and treatment of GnRH deficiency and consequent delayed or absent puberty. Moreover, a better understanding of the mechanisms controlling the episodic release of GnRH during the onset of puberty and the ovulatory cycle has enabled the pharmacological use of GnRH itself or its synthetic analogues (agonists and antagonists) to either stimulate or to block the gonadotrophin secretion and modulate the functions of the reproductive axis in several reproductive diseases and in assisted reproduction technology. Several inputs from other neuronal populations, as well as metabolic, somatic and age-related signals, may greatly affect the functions of the GnRH pulse generator during the female lifespan; their modulation may offer new possible strategies for diagnostic and therapeutic interventions. A GnRH/GnRHR system is also expressed in female reproductive tissues (e.g. endometrium and ovary), both in normal and pathological conditions. The expression of this system in the human endometrium and ovary supports its physiological regulatory role in the processes of trophoblast invasion of the maternal endometrium and embryo implantation as well as of follicular development and corpus luteum functions. The GnRH/GnRHR system that is expressed in diseased tissues of the female reproductive tract (both benign and malignant) is at present considered an effective molecular target for the development of novel therapeutic approaches for these pathologies. GnRH agonists are also considered as a promising therapeutic approach to counteract ovarian failure in young female patients undergoing chemotherapy.

CONCLUSIONS

Increasing knowledge about the regulation of GnRH pulsatile release, as well as the therapeutic use of its analogues, offers interesting new perspectives in the diagnosis, treatment and outcome of female reproductive disorders, including tumoral and iatrogenic diseases.

A global perspective on assisted reproductive technology fertility treatment: an 8-country fertility specialist survey

BACKGROUND

Procedures that may optimize success in achieving live births from assisted reproductive technology (ART) continue to be examined. Not yet considered are the perspectives of fertility specialists regarding important developments in the fertility treatment field, current unmet needs, and anticipated future advances. In the current study, an 8-country survey of fertility specialists was conducted to provide a comprehensive, global depiction of fertility treatments across different regions.

METHODS

Fertility specialists from France, Germany, Italy, Spain, the United Kingdom (UK), the United States (US), China, and Japan were invited to participate in an online survey. Participants were eligible if they personally managed ≥25 patients/month who were experiencing difficulty conceiving, and if they had performed ART fertility treatment with ≥1 patient in the previous month. Quantitative questions addressed the number of patients seen, main infertility causes, number of cycles performed, ART procedure type, and ART outcomes. Qualitative questions covered diagnostic trends, unmet needs, important advances, and expected future developments.

RESULTS

The number of fertility specialists who completed the survey included 29 in France, 33 in Germany, 23 in Italy, 38 in Spain, 34 in the UK, 91 in the US, 50 in China, and 65 in Japan. Patient volume increased over the prior 2 years according to 67 % (242/363) of the fertility specialists. As expected, ART outcomes all declined with age in all countries. ART outcomes varied by country, with the highest implantation, pregnancy, and live birth rates reported by fertility specialists in the US and China and the lowest rates reported in France and Italy. The most frequently reported unmet needs in fertility treatment were financial coverage, improved implantation rate, and egg donation. Most frequently named future advancements expected to change the fertility treatment field included improved embryo selection through imaging and/or metabolomics, improved embryo implantation rate, and use of preimplantation genetic diagnosis.

CONCLUSIONS

This study, which follows a rigorous survey methodology, elucidates the current state of fertility specialists' practices and perspectives on the global fertility treatment field, which highlights differences and similarities among countries. This research may inform further studies and procedural developments that might better improve and standardize ART.

Luteal phase support for assisted reproduction cycles

BACKGROUND

Progesterone prepares the endometrium for pregnancy by stimulating proliferation in response to human chorionic gonadotropin(hCG) produced by the corpus luteum. This occurs in the luteal phase of the menstrual cycle. In assisted reproduction techniques(ART), progesterone and/or hCG levels are low, so the luteal phase is supported with progesterone, hCG or gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists to improve implantation and pregnancy rates.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the relative effectiveness and safety of methods of luteal phase support provided to subfertile women undergoing assisted reproduction.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched databases including the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group (MDSG) Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and trial registers. We conducted searches in November 2014, and further searches on 4 August 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of luteal phase support using progesterone, hCG or GnRH agonist supplementation in ART cycles.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently selected trials, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) and 95%confidence intervals (CIs) for each comparison and combined data when appropriate using a fixed-effect model. Our primary out come was live birth or ongoing pregnancy. The overall quality of the evidence was assessed using GRADE methods.

MAIN RESULTS

Ninety-four women RCTs (26,198 women) were included. Most studies had unclear or high risk of bias in most domains. The main limitations in the evidence were poor reporting of study methods and imprecision due to small sample sizes.1. hCG vs placebo/no treatment (five RCTs, 746 women)There was no evidence of differences between groups in live birth or ongoing pregnancy (OR 1.67, 95% CI 0.90 to 3.12, three RCTs,527 women, I2 = 24%, very low-quality evidence, but I2 of 61% was found for the subgroup of ongoing pregnancy) with a random effects model. hCG increased the risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) (1 RCT, OR 4.28, 95% CI 1.91 to 9.6, low quality evidence).2. Progesterone vs placebo/no treatment (eight RCTs, 875 women)Evidence suggests a higher rate of live birth or ongoing pregnancy in the progesterone group (OR 1.77, 95% CI 1.09 to 2.86, five RCTs, 642 women, I2 = 35%, very low-quality evidence). OHSS was not reported.3. Progesterone vs hCG regimens (16 RCTs, 2162 women)hCG regimens included comparisons of progesterone versus hCG and progesterone versus progesterone + hCG. No evidence showed differences between groups in live birth or ongoing pregnancy (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.38, five RCTs, 833 women, I2 = 0%, low quality evidence) or in the risk of OHSS (four RCTs, 615 women, progesterone vs hCG OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.34; four RCTs,678 women; progesterone vs progesterone plus hCG, OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.09 to 1.26, low-quality evidence).4. Progesterone vs progesterone with oestrogen (16 RCTs, 2577 women)No evidence was found of differences between groups in live birth or ongoing pregnancy (OR 1.12, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.38, nine RCTs,1651 women, I2 = 0%, low-quality evidence) or OHSS (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.2 to 1.63, two RCTs, 461 women, I2 = 0%, low-quality evidence).5. Progesterone vs progesterone + GnRH agonist (seven RCTs, 1708 women)Live birth or ongoing pregnancy rates were lower in the progesterone-only group and increased in women who received progester one and one or more GnRH agonist doses (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.81, nine RCTs, 2861 women, I2 = 55%, random effects, low quality evidence). Statistical heterogeneity for this comparison was high because of unexplained variation in the effect size, but the direction of effect was consistent across studies. OHSS was reported in one study only (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.33 to 3.01, 1 RCT, 300 women, very low quality evidence).6. Progesterone regimens (45 RCTs, 13,814 women)The included studies reported nine different comparisons between progesterone regimens. Findings for live birth or ongoing pregnancy were as follows: intramuscular (IM) versus oral: OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.14 to 3.66 (one RCT, 40 women, very low-quality evidence);IM versus vaginal/rectal: OR 1.24, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.5 (seven RCTs, 2309 women, I2 = 71%, very low-quality evidence); vaginal/rectal versus oral: OR 1.19, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.69 (four RCTs, 857 women, I2 = 32%, low-quality evidence); low-dose versus high-dose vaginal: OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.11 (five RCTs, 3720 women, I2 = 0%, moderate-quality evidence); short versus long protocol:OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.36 (five RCTs, 1205 women, I2 = 0%, low-quality evidence); micronised versus synthetic: OR 0.9, 95%CI 0.53 to 1.55 (two RCTs, 470 women, I2 = 0%, low-quality evidence); vaginal ring versus gel: OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.36 (oneRCT, 1271 women, low-quality evidence); subcutaneous versus vaginal gel: OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.14 (two RCTs, 1465 women,I2 = 0%, low-quality evidence); and vaginal versus rectal: OR 1.28, 95% CI 0.64 to 2.54 (one RCT, 147 women, very low-quality evidence). OHSS rates were reported for only two of these comparisons: IM versus oral, and low versus high-dose vaginal. No evidence showed a difference between groups.7. Progesterone and oestrogen regimens (two RCTs, 1195 women)The included studies compared two different oestrogen protocols. No evidence was found to suggest differences in live birth or ongoing pregnancy rates between a short and a long protocol (OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.43, one RCT, 910 women, low-quality evidence) or between a low dose and a high dose of oestrogen (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.13, one RCT, 285 women, very low-quality evidence).Neither study reported OHSS.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Both progesterone and hCG during the luteal phase are associated with higher rates of live birth or ongoing pregnancy than placebo.The addition of GnRHa to progesterone is associated with an improvement in pregnancy outcomes. OHSS rates are increased with hCG compared to placebo (only study only). The addition of oestrogen does not seem to improve outcomes. The route of progester one administration is not associated with an improvement in outcomes.

Addition of gonadotropin releasing hormone agonist for luteal phase support in in-vitro fertilization: an analysis of 2739 cycles

OBJECTIVE

Luteal phase is defective in in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles, and many regimens were tried for the very best luteal phase support (LPS). Gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist use, which was administered as an adjunct to the luteal phase support in IVF cycles, was suggested to improve pregnancy outcome measures in certain randomized studies. We analyzed the effects of addition of GnRH agonist to standard progesterone luteal support on pregnancy outcome measures, particularly the live birth rates.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This is a retrospective cohort study, including 2739 IVF cycles. Long GnRH agonist and antagonist stimulation IVF cycles with cleavage-stage embryo transfer were included. Cycles were divided into two groups: Group A included cycles with single-dose GnRH agonist plus progesterone LPS and Group B included progesterone only LPS. Live birth rates were the primary outcome measures of the analysis. Miscarriage rates and multiple pregnancy rates were the secondary outcome measures.

RESULTS

Live birth rates were not statistically different in GnRH agonist plus progesterone (Group A) and progesterone only (Group B) groups in both the long agonist and antagonist stimulation arms (40.8%/41.2% and 32.8%/34.4%, p<0.05 respectively). Moreover, pregnancy rates, implantation rates, and miscarriage rates were found to be similar between groups. Multiple pregnancy rates in antagonist cycles were significantly higher in Group A than those in Group B (12.0% and 6.9%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

A beneficial effect of a single dose of GnRH agonist administration as a luteal phase supporting agent is yet to be determined because of the wide heterogeneity of data present in literature. Well-designed randomized clinical studies are required to clarify any effect of luteal GnRH agonist addition on pregnancy outcome measures with different doses, timing, and administration routes of GnRH agonists.

Retrospective comparison of GnRH agonist trigger with HCG trigger in GnRH antagonist cycles in anticipated high-responders

All IVF-ICSI cycles carried out between October 2009 and October 2012 using GnRH agonist (GnRHa) ovulation trigger (n = 62) followed by a single dose of HCG plus progesterone and oestradiol in the luteal phase because of anticipated ovarian hypertsimulation were retrospectively compared with historic control cycles using HCG trigger (n = 29) and standard luteal phase support. Women's mean age, body mass index, anti-Müllerian hormone, FSH, LH, starting and total stimulation dose, number of follicles, oocytes, embryos, fertilization, implantation, polycystic ovary syndrome, ICSI, live birth and ongoing pregnancy rates per embryo transfer were similar (GnRHa 40.7% versus HCG 35.0%). For each started cycle, GnRHa resulted in 11.4% higher (statistically non-significant) live birth and ongoing pregnancy rate (OR 1.73, CI 0.64 to 4.69), with a similar difference for double-embryo transfers (OR 1.62, CI 0.44 to 6.38) and less need for freezing all embryos (9.7% versus 27.6%; P = 0.04). Incidence of mild-to-moderate OHSS was 16.2% with GnRHa trigger and 31.0% with HCG trigger) and no severe OHSS in the former. The addition of single low-dose HCG in the luteal phase after GnRHa trigger for suspected high-responders reduced the incidence of OHSS with good clinical outcomes, compared with HCG trigger.