Utrogestan as an effective oral alternative for preventing premature luteinizing hormone surges in women undergoing controlled ovarian hyperstimulation for in vitro fertilization

Ovarian response and embryo ploidy following oral micronized progesterone-primed ovarian stimulation versus GnRH antagonist protocol. A prospective study with repeated ovarian stimulation cycles

STUDY QUESTION

Is there any difference in ovarian response and embryo ploidy following progesterone-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) using micronized progesterone or GnRH antagonist protocol?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Pituitary downregulation with micronized progesterone as PPOS results in higher number of oocytes retrieved and a comparable number of euploid blastocysts to a GnRH antagonist protocol.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Although the GnRH antagonist is considered by most the gold standard protocol for controlling the LH surge during ovarian stimulation (OS) for IVF/ICSI, PPOS protocols are being increasingly used in freeze-all protocols. Still, despite the promising results of PPOS protocols, an early randomized trial reported potentially lower live births in recipients of oocytes resulting following downregulation with medroxyprogesterone acetate as compared with a GnRH antagonist protocol. The scope of the current prospective study was to investigate whether PPOS with micronized progesterone results in an equivalent yield of euploid blastocysts to a GnRH antagonist protocol.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

In this prospective study, performed between September 2019 to January 2022, 44 women underwent two consecutive OS protocols within a period of 6 months in a GnRH antagonist protocol or in a PPOS protocol with oral micronized progesterone.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Overall, 44 women underwent two OS cycles with an identical fixed dose of rFSH (225 or 300 IU) in both cycles. Downregulation in the first cycles was performed with the use of a flexible GnRH antagonist protocol (0.25 mg per day as soon as one follicle of 14 mm) and consecutively, after a washout period of 1 month, control of LH surge was performed with 200 mg of oral micronized progesterone from stimulation Day 1. After the completion of both cycles, all generated blastocysts underwent genetic analysis for aneuploidy screening (preimplantation genetic testing for aneuplody, PGT-A).

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

Comparisons between protocols did not reveal differences between the duration of OS. The hormonal profile on the day of trigger revealed statistically significant differences between protocols in all the tested hormones except for FSH: with significantly higher serum E2 levels, more elevated LH levels and higher progesterone levels in PPOS cycles as compared with antagonist cycles, respectively. Compared with the GnRH antagonist protocol, the PPOS protocol resulted in a significantly higher number of oocytes (12.7 ± 8.09 versus 10.3 ± 5.84; difference between means [DBM] -2.4 [95% CI -4.1 to -0.73]), metaphase II (9.1 ± 6.12 versus 7.3 ± 4.15; DBM -1.8 [95% CI -3.1 to -0.43]), and 2 pronuclei (7.1 ± 4.99 versus 5.7 ± 3.35; DBM -1.5 [95% CI -2.6.1 to -0.32]), respectively. Nevertheless, no differences were observed regarding the mean number of blastocysts between the PPOS and GnRH antagonist protocols (2.9 ± 2.11 versus 2.8 ± 2.12; DBM -0.07 [95% CI -0.67 to 0.53]) and the mean number of biopsied blastocysts (2.9 ± 2.16 versus 2.9 ± 2.15; DBM -0.07 [95% CI -0.70 to 0.56]), respectively. Concerning the euploidy rates per biopsied embryo, a 29% [95% CI 21.8-38.1%] and a 35% [95% CI 26.6-43.9%] were noticed in the PPOS and antagonist groups, respectively. Finally, no difference was observed for the primary outcome, with a mean number of euploid embryos of 0.86 ± 0.90 versus 1.00 ± 1.12 for the comparison of PPOS versus GnRh antagonist.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

The study was powered to detect differences in the mean number of euploid embryos and not in terms of pregnancy outcomes. Additionally, per protocol, there was no randomization, the first cycle was always a GnRH antagonist cycle and the second a PPOS with 1 month of washout period in between.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

In case of a freeze-all protocol, clinicians may safely consider oral micronized progesterone to control the LH surge and patients could benefit from the advantages of a medication of oral administration, with a potentially higher number of oocytes retrieved at a lower cost, without any compromise in embryo ploidy rates.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

This research was supported by an unrestricted grant from Theramex. N.P.P. has received Research grants from Merck Serono, Organon, Ferring Pharmaceutical, Roche, Theramex, IBSA, Gedeon Richter, and Besins Healthcare; honoraria for lectures from: Merck Serono, Organon, Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Besins International, Roche Diagnostics, IBSA, Theramex, and Gedeon Richter; consulting fees from Merck Serono, Organon, Besins Healthcare, and IBSA. M.d.M.V., F.M., and I.R. declared no conflicts of interest.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

The study was registered at Clinical Trials Gov. (NCT04108039).

Comparison of progesterone protocol versus gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol in terms of preventing premature LH surge and assisted reproductive technology outcome in infertile women: a randomized controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Progesterone can be used instead of GnRH agonists and antagonists in order to avert a premature LH surge during controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) protocol. Nonetheless, there is limited knowledge regarding its utilization. Thus, this study compared the effects of progesterone and GnRH antagonists (GnRH-ant) on premature LH surges and assisted reproductive technology (ART) results in infertile women undergoing ART.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

In this clinical trial, the progesterone protocol (study group) and GnRH-ant protocol (control group) were tested in 300 infertile individuals undergoing IVF/ICSI. The main outcome was the number of oocytes retrieved. The secondary outcomes included premature LH rise/surge, the quantity of follicles measuring ≥ 10 and 14 mm, oocyte maturity and fertilization rate, the number of viable embryos, high-quality embryo rate and pregnancy outcomes.

RESULTS

The study group exhibited a statistically significant increase in the number of retrieved oocytes, follicles measuring 14 mm or greater, and viable embryos compared to the control group (P < 0.05). The study group also increased oocyte maturity, chemical pregnancy rate, and clinical pregnancy rate (P < 0.05). Both groups had similar mean serum LH, progesterone, and E2 levels on trigger day. The control group had more premature LH rise than the study group, although this difference was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, it can be stated that the progesterone protocol and the GnRH-ant protocol exhibit similar rates of sudden premature LH surge in infertile patients. However, it is important to note that the two regiments differ in their outcomes in ART.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was retrospectively registered in the Iranian website ( www.irct.ir ) for clinical trials registration ( http://www.irct.ir : IRCT-ID: IRCT20201029049183N, 2020-11-27).

Progestin primed ovarian stimulation using dydrogesterone from day 7 of the cycle onwards in oocyte donation cycles: a longitudinal study

RESEARCH QUESTION

Does a progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) protocol with dydrogesterone from cycle day 7 yield similar outcomes compared with a gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol in the same oocyte donors?

DESIGN

This retrospective longitudinal study included 128 cycles from 64 oocyte donors. All oocyte donors had the same type of gonadotrophin and daily dose in both stimulation cycles. The primary outcome was the number of cumulus-oocyte complexes (COC) retrieved.

RESULTS

The number of COC retrieved (mean ± SD 19.7 ± 10.8 versus 19.2 ± 8.3; P = 0.5) and the number of metaphase II oocytes (15.5 ± 8.4 versus 16.2 ± 7.0; P = 0.19) were similar for the PPOS and GnRH antagonist protocols, respectively. The duration of stimulation (10.5 ± 1.5 days versus 10.8 ± 1.5 days; P = 0.14) and consumption of gonadotrophins (2271.9 ± 429.7 IU versus 2321.5 ± 403.4 IU; P = 0.2) were also comparable, without any cases of premature ovulation. Nevertheless, there was a significant difference in the total cost of medication per cycle: €898.3 ± 169.9 for the PPOS protocol versus €1196.4 ± 207.5 (P < 0.001) for the GnRH antagonist protocol.

CONCLUSION

The number of oocytes retrieved and number of metaphase II oocytes were comparable in both stimulation protocols, with the advantage of significant cost reduction in favour of the PPOS protocol compared with the GnRH antagonist protocol. No cases of premature ovulation were observed, even when progestin was started later in the stimulation.

Micronized natural progesterone (Seidigestan®) vs GnRH antagonists for preventing the LH surge during controlled ovarian stimulation (PRO_NAT study): study protocol of a randomized clinical trial

Introduction

Progesterone-primed cycles effectively suppress the pituitary LH surge during ovarian stimulation in oocyte donors and in the infertile population. Particularly in oocyte donors, the use of synthetic progesterone (progestins) has been explored in prospective clinical trials, showing mixed results. This trial was designed to determine whether the use of micronized natural progesterone is as effective as the GnRH-antagonist protocol in terms of the number of mature oocytes (MII) retrieved in oocyte donation cycles as a primary outcome, and it also aims to explore the corresponding results in recipients as a secondary outcome.

Methods

We propose a prospective, open-label, non-inferiority clinical trial to compare a novel approach for oocyte donors with a control group, which follows the standard ovarian stimulation protocol used in our institution. A total of 150 donors (75 in each group) will be recruited and randomized using a computer algorithm. After obtaining informed consent, participants will be randomly assigned to one of two ovarian stimulation protocols: either the standard GnRH antagonist or the oral micronized natural progesterone protocol. Both groups will receive recombinant gonadotropins tailored to their antral follicle count and prior donation experiences, if any. The primary outcome is the number of mature metaphase II (MII) oocytes. Secondary measures include treatment duration, pregnancy outcomes in recipients, as well as the economic cost per MII oocyte obtained in each treatment regimen. Analyses for the primary outcome will be conducted in both the intention-to-treat (ITT) and per-protocol (PP) populations. Each donor can participate only once during the recruitment period. The estimated duration of the study is six months for the primary outcome and 15 months for the secondary outcomes.

Discussion

The outcomes of this trial have the potential to inform evidence-based adjustments in the management of ovarian stimulation protocols for oocyte donors.

Clinical trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier, NCT05954962.

Effect of trigger day serum luteinising hormone levels on the in-vitro fertilization outcome: an observational study

OBJECTIVE

Controlled ovarian stimulation leads to profound changes in the endocrine characteristics of the ovarian cycle. Serum luteinising hormone (LH) levels on the day of trigger have been shown to correlate with oocyte quality and pregnancy rate in antagonist cycles.

METHODS

This is an observational study of 86 women undergoing an antagonist in-vitro fertilisation cycle. Oocyte maturation trigger used was either Inj. human chorionic gonadotropin or Inj. triptorelin 0.2 mg s/c or a combination of both. Women were categorised into four groups based on serum LH levels on the day of trigger i.e., LH ≤0.5 (n=8), LH=0.6- 1.0 international units (IU)/L (n=12), LH=1.0-1.5 IU/L (n=13), and LH >1.6 IU/L (n=53) and the subgroup analysis was done based on type of trigger used.

RESULTS

Mature oocyte (MII) retrieval rate did not show a significant relation with serum LH levels (87%, 89%, 77%, and 76% in groups with LH <0.5, 0.5-1.0, 1.0-1.5, and >1.5 IU/L respectively; P-value=0.243). There was no significant difference in the clinical pregnancy rate either when women were split according to the type of trigger given or according to trigger day LH levels. Women with low LH levels (<0.5 IU/L) required significantly more doses of gonadotropins compared to women with LH levels of 1.0-1.5 IU/L. (3,531+1,133 vs. 2,281+938; P-value=0.01).

CONCLUSION

Based on the observation from the current study, there was no significant association of serum LH levels with MII retrieval rate and clinical pregnancy rate. The group with low LH levels required slightly longer days of stimulation.

Comparison of Cumulative Live Birth Rates Between Progestin and GnRH Analogues in Preimplantation Genetic Testing Cycles

CONTEXT

Progestins have recently been used as an alternative for gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogues to prevent premature luteinizing hormone surge due to the application of vitrification technology. However, the long-term efficacy and safety of a progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) regimen, including oocyte competence, cumulative live birth rate (LBR), and offspring outcomes, remain to be investigated.

OBJECTIVE

To compare cumulative LBR of preimplantation genetic testing (PGT) cycles between a PPOS regimen and GnRH analogues.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study at a tertiary academic medical center. A total of 967 patients with good prognosis were categorized into 3 groups, of which 478 patients received a long GnRH agonist, 248 patients received a GnRH antagonist, and 250 received a PPOS regimen. Medroxyprogesterone 17-acetate was the only progestin used in the PPOS regimen. The primary outcome was cumulative LBR. Secondary outcomes included time to live birth, cumulative rates of biochemical and clinical pregnancy and pregnancy loss, and perinatal outcomes.

RESULTS

The PPOS regimen was negatively associated with cumulative LBR compared with GnRH antagonists and GnRH agonists (28.4% vs 40.7% and 42.7%). The average time to live birth was significantly shorter with GnRH antagonists than with the PPOS regimen. The cumulative biochemical and clinical pregnancy rates were also lower in the PPOS regimen than GnRH analogues, while cumulative pregnancy loss rates were similar across groups. Furthermore, the number and ratio of good-quality blastocysts were significantly reduced in the PPOS regimen compared with GnRH analogues. In addition, perinatal outcomes were comparable across 3 groups.

CONCLUSION

A PPOS regimen may be adversely affect cumulative LBR and blastocyst quality in women with good prognosis compared with GnRH analogues in PGT cycles.

Role and effectiveness of progestins in pituitary suppression during ovarian stimulation for assisted reproductive technology: a systematic review and a meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Despite the many unknowns about its exact mechanism, progesterone and progestins are being successfully used to prevent luteinizing hormone (LH) surge during ovarian stimulation for assisted reproductive technology (ART). We will review progestin primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) protocols in comparison with gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) analogues and each other.

EVIDENCE ACQUISITION

MEDLINE via PubMed; Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); Scopus; Web of Science were screened with keywords related to assisted reproductive technology, ovarian stimulation progesterone, GnRH analogue and progesterone in several combinations. Search period was from the date of inception of each database until 20 May 2022.

EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS

Live birth or ongoing pregnancy rate per embryo transfer (ET) was similar in PPOS and GnRH antagonist cycles (RR=1.16, 95% CI: 0.93-1.44). Clinical pregnancy rate per ET was likewise similar (RR=1.12, 95% CI: 0.92-1.37). Miscarriage rate per pregnancy was similar with PPOS and GnRH antagonists in autologous cycles (RR=1.01, 95% CI: 0.65-1.55). Pooled analyses showed similar live birth rate between progestins and short GnRH agonist protocols (RR=1.01, 95% CI: 0.49-2.09), however, clinical pregnancy rates per ET were significantly higher with progestins (RR=1.31, 95% CI: 1.06-1.62). Miscarriage rate per pregnancy was similar with progestins (RR=0.82, 95% CI: 0.55-1.21).

CONCLUSIONS

Progestins seem to be an efficient option for pituitary suppression during ovarian suppression, providing similar outcomes for stimulation and pregnancy. They can be especially beneficial for women for whom fresh ET is not considered.

Medroxyprogesterone acetate: an alternative to GnRH-antagonist in oocyte vitrification for social fertility preservation and preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy

RESEARCH QUESTION

Can medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) be used as a pituitary suppressor instead of a gonadotrophin releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist during ovarian stimulation in elective fertility preservation and preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) cycles?

DESIGN

A multicentre, retrospective, observational, cohort study conducted in 11 IVIRMA centres affiliated to private universities. Of a total of 1652 cycles of social fertility preservation, 267 patients were stimulated using a progestin-primed ovarian stimulation protocol (PPOS), and 1385 patients received a GnRH antagonist. In the PGT-A cycles, 5661 treatments were analysed: 635 patients received MPA and 5026 patients received GnRH antagonist. A further 66 fertility preservation and 1299 PGT-A cycles were cancelled. All cycles took place between June 2019 and December 2021.

RESULTS

In the social fertility preservation cycles, the number of mature oocytes vitrified in MPA was similar to the number of those treated with an antagonist, a trend that was seen regardless of age (≤35 or >35 years). In the PGT-A cycles, no differences were found in number of metaphase II, two pronuclei, number of biopsied embryos (4.4 ± 3.1 versus 4.5 ± 3.1), rate of euploidy (57.9% versus 56.4%) or ongoing pregnancy rate (50.4% versus 47.1%, P = 0.119) between the group receiving MPA versus a GnRH antagonist, whereas the clinical miscarriage rate was higher in the antagonist group (10.4% versus 14.8%, P = 0.019).

CONCLUSIONS

Administration of PPOS yields similar results to GnRH antagonists in oocytes retrieved, rate of euploid embryos and clinical outcome. Hence, PPOS can be recommended for ovarian stimulation in social fertility preservation and PGT-A cycles, as it allows greater patient comfort.

Analysis of euploidy rates in preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy cycles with progestin-primed versus GnRH agonist/antagonist protocol

BACKGROUND

Progestins can suppress endogenous luteinising hormone (LH) secretion from the pituitary gland and have shown similar efficacy in terms of collecting competent oocytes and embryos; however, some inconsistencies have been proposed regarding the quality of embryos collected with the use of progestins. This study aimed to evaluate euploidy rates and pregnancy outcomes in preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) cycles using the progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) protocol versus the gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist/antagonist protocol.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included 608 PGT-A cycles: 146 women in the PPOS group, 160 women in the GnRH agonist group, and 302 women in the GnRH antagonist group. This study was performed at the in vitro fertilisation (IVF) centre of Shanghai First Maternity and Infant Hospital between January 2019 and December 2021. Additionally, 267 corresponding first frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles were analysed to assess pregnancy outcomes.

RESULTS

The euploid blastocyst rate per injected metaphase II(MII) oocytes (14.60% vs. 14.09% vs. 13.94%) was comparable among the three groups (p > 0.05). No significant differences were observed among the three groups regarding pregnancy outcomes, including biochemical pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, ongoing pregnancy, implantation, miscarriage, ectopic pregnancy, and live birth rates per transfer in the first FET cycles (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The PPOS protocol had no negative effect on euploid blastocyst formation, and the pregnancy outcomes in FET cycles using the PPOS protocol were similar to those of the GnRH agonist and antagonist protocols. Trial registration This trial was retrospectively registered.

Cumulative live birth rates for low-prognosis women over 5 years or 9 frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles

Background

For heterogeneous populations of low-prognosis women, it remains unclear as to how long individuals should continue undergoing ART when attempting to have a baby, as there have been insufficient studies to date tracking the cumulative live birth rates (CLBRs) for these women over the entire course of their ART treatment, particularly over extended time periods.

Methods

This was a retrospective analysis of 17,698 women at a tertiary care academic medical center who had begun undergoing IVI/ICSI cycles using a progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) approach between January 2013 and January 2019. Low-prognosis patients were stratified into four groups based upon POSEIDON criteria, with patients exhibiting normal or high ovarian reserves and response to stimulation (defined as AFC ≥5, > 9 oocytes retrieved) being included as controls (group 5). The CLBR within 5 years or 9 FET cycles from the ovum pick-up (OPU) day of the first cycle was the primary endpoint for this study, including all repetitive oocyte retrieval cycles and subsequent FET cycles. Optimistic and conservative approaches were used for the analysis of CLBRs and the depiction of cumulative incidence curves.

Results

Under both optimistic and conservative model analyses, normal and good responders exhibited the highest CLBR within 5 years or 9 FET cycles, followed by younger unexpected poor responders, younger expected poor responders, older unexpected poor responders, and older expected poor responders. Upward trends in CLBRs were evident across the five groups with the prolongation of time or an increase in FET cycle counts. Within the first 2 years or 3 FET cycles, the CLBRs rose rapidly, followed by more moderate increases over the following 2–3.5 years or 4–6 cycles, with expected poor responders exhibiting the most obvious improvements. All Patients reached a CLBR plateau after 3.5 years or 6 FET cycles.

Conclusions

All low-prognosis women should undergo ART treatment for a minimum of 2 years or 3 FET cycles, and exhibit better outcomes when extending ART treatment to 3.5 years or 6 FET cycles (particularly for POSEIDON groups 3 and 4), but should consider ceasing further treatment thereafter due to a lack of apparent benefit.

Neonatal outcomes and congenital malformations in children born after progestin-primed ovarian stimulation protocol

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study is to assess the safety of progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) protocol regarding the neonatal outcomes and congenital malformations in babies born after in vitro fertilization (IVF) and frozen embryo transfer (FET).

METHODS

In this large retrospective cohort study, a total of 16,493 infants born between 1 September 2013 and 31 July 2021 from IVF and FET cycles after treatment with either PPOS (n = 15,245) or gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH-ant) (n = 1,248) were finally enrolled. The primary outcome measure was the incidence of congenital malformations. The secondary outcome measures were rates of low birth weight (LBW), very low birth weight (VLBW), preterm birth (PTB), very preterm birth (VPTB), and early neonatal death.

RESULTS

Birth characteristics for both singletons and twins regarding the sex of infants, gestational age, birth weight, and birth length were comparable between the PPOS group and the GnRH-ant group. Rates of LBW, VLBW, PTB, VPTB, and early neonatal death were also similar. The reanalysis using propensity score matching (PSM) and multivariable logistic regression indicated that the PPOS protocol could not increase the risk of adverse neonatal outcomes compared with the GnRH-ant protocol. Furthermore, no significant difference was observed in the overall incidence of congenital malformations in live-born babies. After PSM and controlling for all confounders, the results remained insignificant with an adjusted odds ratio of 0.66 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.32-1.34] and 2.43 [95% CI 0.97-6.06], respectively, for singletons and twins.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study suggests that compared with GnRH-ant treatment for IVF, the PPOS protocol could not produce a negative effect on the newborn population in terms of neonatal outcomes and congenital malformations.

Body Mass Index Showed No Impact on the Outcome of In Vitro Fertilization in Progestin-Primed Ovarian Stimulation Protocol

Purpose

To assess whether body mass index (BMI) affects the outcome of in vitro fertilization (IVF) in progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) protocol.

Methods

A retrospective study was conducted in the Reproductive Medicine Center, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, from June 2016 to June 2017. 636 infertile women who received PPOS protocol in IVF treatment were divided into three groups according to BMI. The data of basic characteristics, embryological outcomes, and cycle characteristics of controlled ovarian stimulation of different groups were collected and studied. Result(s). There was no significant difference in almost all the basic characteristics, embryological outcomes of controlled ovarian stimulation, and cycle characteristics of controlled ovarian stimulation among the three groups. There was a tendency that the duration of infertility was decreased with the increase of patients' weight, although there was no significant difference (P=0.051). However, overweight patients had a higher fertilization rate than normal weight patients and underweight patients (70.3 vs. 67.7 vs. 66.8, P=0.008), but two-pronuclei (2PN) fertilization rate and cleavage rate showed no significant difference among the three groups. Conclusion(s). BMI showed no impact on the outcome of the ovarian stimulation outcome in PPOS protocol. PPOS protocol may benefit overweight patients, for it attains the same effect with normal patients and requires no increase in gonadotropin (Gn) dose and Gn duration.

A comprehensive evaluation of progestin-primed ovarian stimulation protocol in patients with or without PCOS undergoing in vitro fertilization

Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) regimen was established for assisted reproduction. However, its feasibility and outcomes in polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) patients need further evaluation. The outcomes of infertile patients with PCOS (study group) and normal ovaries (control group with unexplained infertility and tubal factor infertility) who underwent PPOS and IVF/ICSI protocol were retrospectively studied. The baseline information, primary, and secondary outcomes of patients were collected. The dynamic changes of hormones were closely monitored. 198 PCOS patients and 374 controls were included in this study. After controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH), 15 oocytes were retrieved from PCOS patients on average, which was more than those from the controls (p < 0.001). The oocytes and embryos obtained from the PCOS patients exhibited better developmental potential as the number of fertilized oocytes, cleaved embryos, top-quality embryos, viable embryos, cryopreserved embryos, the rate of fertilization, and viable embryo per oocyte retrieved in PCOS patients were significantly higher than those in the controls (all p < 0.001). No significant difference between the two groups was identified regarding the primary outcome, ongoing pregnancy, and other secondary outcomes. No moderate to severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) was diagnosed in either group. With the proposed PPOS protocol, the quantity, quality, developmental potential of oocytes, and embryos obtained from PCOS patients were superior to those from controls. The protocol was efficient and safe in terms of pregnancy, obstetric, and perinatal outcomes. OHSS was effectively mitigated in the patients, with or without PCOS, who underwent COH.

Granulosa cells apoptosis and follicular fluid hormones: comparison of progestin-primed ovarian stimulation versus GnRH antagonist protocols

OBJECTIVE

To explore the effect of progestin-primed ovarian stimulation protocol (PPOS) on mural granulosa cells (GCs) apoptosis and hormonal profiles in follicular fluid (FF) and efficacy over GnRH antagonist (GnRH-A) protocols.

METHODS

We performed a prospective cohort study from June through August 2017 at a tertiary teaching hospital. 63 Patients meeting our criteria were recruited in this prospective study voluntarily and stratified to PPOS or GnRH-A group randomly. Mural GCs and FF were collected during oocyte retrieval. Apoptosis of GCs was assessed using the Annexin V-affinity assay by flow cytometry and hormonal profiles in FF were measured using electrochemiluminescence.

RESULTS

A total of 63 women were assessed for eligibility, with 25 cases in PPOS group and 38 in GnRH-A group. Difference of early stage apoptosis rate, late stage apoptosis rate, and total apoptosis rate did not reach statistical significance between groups. Meanwhile, concentrations of hormones in FF were comparable in two groups. No statistically significant differences were observed in number of oocytes retrieved, mature oocyte rate, fertilization rate, and top-quality embryos rate. No patients experienced premature LH surge in both groups during the study.

CONCLUSION

Compared to GnRH antagonist protocol, PPOS had comparable laboratory outcomes, GCs apoptosis rate and hormonal profiles in FF. PPOS is an effective and safe alternative option to provide controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH).

When Should We Freeze Embryos? Current Data for Fresh and Frozen Embryo Replacement IVF Cycles

Recent years have seen a dramatic rise in the number of frozen-thawed embryo replacement (FER) cycles. Along with the advances in embryo cryopreservation techniques, the optimization of endometrial receptivity has resulted in outcomes for FER that are similar to fresh embryo transfer. However, the question of whether the Freeze all strategy is for all is nowadays a hot topic. This review addresses this issue and describes current evidence based on randomized controlled trials and observational studies. To date, it is reasonable to perform FER in cases with a clear indication for the benefits of such strategy including impending ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) or preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A); however, this strategy does not fit for all. This review analyses the pros and cons of the freeze all strategy highlighting the need to follow a personalized plan in embryo transfer, avoiding a freeze all methodology for all patients in an unselected manner.

Dydrogesterone versus medroxyprogesterone acetate co-treatment ovarian stimulation for IVF: a matched cohort study of 236 freeze-all-IVF cycles

This matched cohort study was retrospectively performed, with cycles extracted from freeze-all-IVF treatments performed between March and November 2019, to compare the efficacy of flexible-start dydrogesterone (DYG) co-treatment ovarian stimulations (OS) with flexible-start medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) co-treatment OS. DYG cycles were matched 1:1 with MPA cycles using female age and antral follicle count, resulting in 236 matched cycles. OS durations and total FSH doses were similar in DYG and MPA OS cycles. The numbers of mature oocytes retrieved were similar; however, the mature oocyte retrieval rate was significantly lower (66.7 vs. 78.2%; p = .001) and the cycle cancellation rates were higher (29.2 vs. 21.2%; p = .056) in DYG co-treatments. A linear regression selected OS co-treatment protocol (0.53 DYG (0.356-0.776), p = .001) into the final model to predict a ≥ 80% mature oocyte retrieval rate. The per transfer (47.2 vs. 49.7; p = .721) and per treatment ongoing pregnancy rates (32.2 vs. 38.1%, p = .210) were similar in the two co-treatment groups. Flexible-start DYG co-treatment OS was as effective in blastocyst freeze-all-IVF cycles as MPA co-treatment, with similar ongoing pregnancy rates; however, mature oocyte retrieval was significantly decreased and cycle cancellation increased in DYG cycles.Impact statementWhat is already known on this subject? Progestin (i.e. artificial progesterone) co-treatment has long been known to be a feasible alternative to conventional GnRH-analogue co-treatment in OS for IVF, because of the long-standing evidence that progestin formulations have in oral contraceptive therapies. The recent evolution of effective freeze-all-IVF (in which high mid-cycle progesterone levels is not of concern because of the postponement of embryo transfer) has now made it possible to investigate progestin co-treatment OS in IVF.What do the results of this study add? Ongoing pregnancy rates from blastocyst frozen embryo transfers in flexible-start dydrogesterone (DYG) co-treatment ovarian stimulation (OS) cycles were similar to rates in flexible-start medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) co-treatment OS cycles. The mature oocyte retrieval rate was significantly lower and the cycle cancellation rate higher in DYG than in MPA cycles.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? The evidence suggests that MPA co-treatment should be preferred in OS for IVF. Further investigation is required to refine progestin co-treatment protocols, because of their potential to reduce the number of viable blastocysts.

Medroxyprogesterone acetate is a useful alternative to a gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist in oocyte donation: a randomized, controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare ovarian response and reproductive outcomes in oocyte donors undergoing pituitary suppression with medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) versus those undergoing conventional treatment with a gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist.

DESIGN

A prospective, randomized, controlled trial of cycles was conducted from October 2017 to June 2019 to evaluate ovarian response in terms of the number of oocytes. The reproductive outcomes of the recipients were retrospectively analyzed later.

SETTING

A university-affiliated private in vitro fertilization center.

PATIENT(S)

We randomly divided 318 donors into 2 groups in a 1:1 ratio. The oocytes obtained were assigned to 364 recipients. One hundred sixty-one donors were treated with a daily dose of 10 mg of MPA administered orally from the beginning of ovarian stimulation (OS), and 156 were treated with a GnRH antagonist (initiated once the leading follicle reached a diameter of 13 mm). Transvaginal ultrasound was performed, and serum estradiol, luteinizing hormone, and progesterone levels were recorded during monitoring. The following additional parameters were analyzed: endocrine profile (in follicular fluid), number of metaphase II oocytes, and pregnancy outcome.

INTERVENTION(S)

The donors included in the study group were stimulated using recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone and MPA at 10 mg/day, simultaneously begun on cycle day 2 or 3. Ovulation was induced using a GnRH agonist when dominant follicles matured. A short protocol with ganirelix at 0.25 mg/day was used for the control group. Oocytes were assigned to the recipients, followed by routine in vitro fertilization procedures in which 1 embryo was usually transferred.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

The primary outcome measure was the numbers of oocytes and metaphase II oocytes retrieved. The secondary outcomes were the incidence of premature luteinizing hormone surge, serum and follicular fluid hormone profiles, and clinical pregnancy outcomes in the recipient group.

RESULT(S)

The number of oocytes retrieved was 21.4 ± 11.7 in the MPA group and 21.2 ± 9.2 in the antagonist group (mean difference 0.14; 95% confidence interval -2.233, 2.517). The total dose of recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone, duration of OS, and endocrine profiles of the serum and follicular fluids were comparable in the 2 groups. No early ovulation was observed in either group. No statistically significant differences with respect to implantation rate (68.1% in the MPA group vs. 62% in the antagonist group), clinical pregnancy rate (64.5% in the MPA group vs. 57.8 in the antagonist group), ongoing pregnancy rate (55.4% in the MPA group vs. 48.5% in the antagonist group), live birth rate (55.1% in the MPA group vs. 48.5% in the antagonist group), or cumulative live birth rate (73.8% in the MPA group vs. 70.7% in the antagonist group) were observed between the groups.

CONCLUSION(S)

The administration of MPA resulted in oocyte retrieval rates, endocrine profiles, viable embryo numbers, and pregnancy outcomes similar to those achieved with the GnRH antagonist. Therefore, MPA can be recommended for OS in oocyte donation because it permits a more patient-friendly approach.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT03300960.

Premature ovarian insufficiency patients with viable embryos derived from autologous oocytes through repeated oocyte retrievals could obtain reasonable cumulative pregnancy outcomes following frozen-embryo transfer

Background

Women with premature ovarian insufficiency (POI) are often discouraged from using autologous oocytes; however, some patients have a strong desire to be genetically linked to their offspring. In the present study, we aimed to estimate cumulative pregnancy outcomes following frozen-embryo transfer (FET) in POI patients who could obtain viable embryos with their eggs during in vitro fertilization (IVF)/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) treatments.

Methods

In this matched-retrospective cohort study, only patients undergoing IVF/ICSI treatments with a freeze-all strategy were screened, and 103 POI patients were matched with 515 normal controls in terms of the same number of viable embryos obtained at the same age. The primary outcome was the cumulative clinical pregnancy rate (CCPR) following FET per patient.

Results

Patients with POI and normal ovarian reserve had comparable CCPRs of 62.14% (64/103) and 65.24% (336/515), respectively (P=0.547), and no statistical difference was found in the cumulative live-birth rate (CLBR) between the study group (43.69%) and the control group (53.01%). Based on binary logistic regression, the CCPR and CLBR showed no association with the type of ovarian function (POI or normal ovarian reserve). The number of embryos per transfer and the sum of all viable embryos per patient were positively associated with the CCPR and CLBR. The clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) per FET cycle was 38.17% for the study group and 52.1% for the control group, while the CPRs per oocyte retrieval cycle in the 2 groups were 11.25% and 69.9%, respectively, and both were statistically different (P<0.05). Moreover, POI patients had a lower implantation rate (27.8% vs. 37.94%) and a higher early miscarriage rate per transfer (26.76% vs. 15%) than patients in the control group (P<0.05).

Conclusions

Cumulative pregnancy outcomes following FET were reasonable for POI patients using viable embryos derived from autologous oocytes through repeated oocyte retrievals.

Endocrinological effects of social exclusion and inclusion: Experimental evidence for adaptive regulation of female fecundity

When current conditions are probabilistically less suitable for successful reproduction than future conditions, females may prevent or delay reproduction until conditions improve. Throughout human evolution, social support was likely crucial to female reproductive success. Women may thus have evolved fertility regulation systems sensitive to cues from the social environment. However, current understanding of how psychological phenomena might affect female ovarian function is limited. In this study, we examined whether cues of reduced social support-social ostracism-impact women's hormone production. Following an in-lab group bonding task, women were randomly assigned to a social exclusion (n = 88) or social inclusion (n = 81) condition. After social exclusion, women with low background levels of social support experienced a decrease in estradiol relative to progesterone. In contrast, socially-included women with low background social support experienced an increase in estradiol relative to progesterone. Hormonal changes in both conditions occurred specifically when women were in their mid-to-late follicular phase, when baseline estradiol is high and progesterone is low. Follow-up analyses revealed that these changes were primarily driven by changes in progesterone, consistent with existing evidence for disruption of ovarian function following adrenal release of follicular-phase progesterone. Results offer support for a potential mechanism by which fecundity could respond adaptively to the loss or lack of social support.

Ovarian stimulation for oocyte donation: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Since its introduction in the 1980s, oocyte donation (OD) has been largely integrated into ART. Lately, both demand and the indications for OD have increased greatly. Oocyte donors are healthy and potentially fertile women undergoing voluntarily ovarian stimulation (OS). Selection of the optimal type of stimulation is of paramount importance in order to achieve the most favourable outcomes for the oocyte recipients, but most importantly for the safety of the oocyte donors.

OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE

This is the first systematic review (SR) with the objective to summarize the current evidence on OS in oocyte donors. The scope of this SR was to evaluate the OD programme by assessing four different aspects: how to assess the ovarian response prior to stimulation; how to plan the OS (gonadotrophins; LH suppression; ovulation trigger; when to start OS); how to control for the risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) and other complications; and the differences between the use of fresh versus vitrified donated oocytes.

SEARCH METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted in May 2020, according to PRISMA guidelines in the databases PubMed and Embase, using a string that combined synonyms for oocytes, donation, banking, freezing, complications and reproductive outcomes. Studies reporting on the safety and/or efficacy of OS in oocyte donors were identified. The quality of the included studies was assessed using ROBINS-I and ROB2. Meta-analysis was performed where appropriate. Data were combined to calculate mean differences (MD) for continuous variables and odd ratios (OR) for binary data with their corresponding 95% CIs. Heterogeneity between the included studies was assessed using I2 and tau statistics.

OUTCOMES

In total, 57 manuscripts were selected for the review, out of 191 citations identified. Antral follicle count and anti-Müllerian hormone levels correlate with ovarian response to OS in OD but have limited value to discriminate donors who are likely to show either impaired or excessive response. Five randomized controlled trials compared different type of gonadotrophins as part of OS in oocyte donors; owing to high heterogeneity, meta-analysis was precluded. When comparing different types of LH control, namely GnRH antagonist versus agonist, the studies showed no differences in ovarian response. Use of progesterone primed ovarian stimulation protocols has been evaluated in seven studies: the evidence has shown little or no difference, compared to GnRH antagonist protocols, in mean number of retrieved oocytes (MD 0.23, [95% CI 0.58-1.05], n = 2147; 6 studies; I2 = 13%, P = 0.33) and in clinical pregnancy rates among recipients (OR 0.87 [95% CI 0.60-1.26], n = 2260, I2 = 72%, P < 0.01). There is insufficient evidence on long-term safety for babies born. GnRH agonist triggering is the gold standard and should be used in all oocyte donors, given the excellent oocyte retrieval rates, the practical elimination of OHSS and no differences in pregnancy rates in recipients (four studies, OR 0.86, 95%CI 0.58-1.26; I2 = 0%). OS in OD is a safe procedure with a low rate of hospitalization after oocyte retrieval. The use of a levonorgestrel intrauterine device or a progestin contraceptive pill during OS does not impact the number of oocytes retrieved or the clinical pregnancy rate in recipients. Ultrasound monitoring seems enough for an adequate follow up of the stimulation cycle in OD. Use of fresh versus vitrified donated oocytes yielded similar pregnancy outcomes.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS

This update will be helpful in the clinical management of OS in OD based on the most recent knowledge and recommendations, and possibly in the management of women under 35 years undergoing oocyte vitrification for social freezing, owing to the population similarities. More clinical research is needed on OS protocols that are specifically designed for OD, especially in term of the long-term safety for newborns, effective contraception during OS, and treatment satisfaction.

Progesterone protocol versus gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol in women with polycystic ovarian syndrome undergoing in vitro fertilization treatments with frozen-thawed embryo transfer: a prospective randomized controlled trial

Background

Exogenous progestational agents have recently been introduced as an alternative pituitary modulator for the prevention of premature luteinizing hormone (LH) surges during in vitro fertilization (IVF)/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) treatments. There is increasing evidence that frozen-embryo transfer (FET) is associated with a lower risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) in women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). Herein, we compared the clinical outcomes of the progesterone protocol with the gonadotropin releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH-ant) protocol in PCOS patients with a ‘‘freeze-all’’ strategy.

Methods

In this prospective single-central randomized controlled trial, a total of 120 PCOS patients undergoing their first IVF/ICSI treatment were randomly assigned to receive the progesterone protocol (study group) or GnRH-ant protocol (control group). The main outcome was the number of oocytes retrieved. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of premature LH rise/surge, the number of viable embryos, and pregnancy outcomes.

Results

The number of retrieved oocytes (14.65±7.64 versus 12.8±8.57) and viable embryos (5.38±3.54 versus 5.03±3.92) in the study group were comparable to those in the control group (P>0.05). Similarly, no between-group differences were found in the number of mature oocytes, fertilized oocytes, cleaved embryos, and the viable embryo rate per oocyte retrieved (P>0.05). However, the oocyte retrieval rate (66.02%±19.63% versus 54.38%±26.39%) and fertilization rate (78.12%±18.41% versus 62.76%±23.32%) in the study group were significantly more than that in the control group (P<0.05). The mean serum LH value on day 6–7 was lower in the study group than that in the control group (7.47±0.97 versus 3.98±0.52 IU/L, P<0.05), and the incidence of premature LH rise was higher in the study group than in the control group, although no patients experienced premature LH surge. The clinical pregnancy rate [58.82% vs. 57.32%, RR 0.94 (95% CI: 0.508, 1.738), P>0.05] and implantation rate [43.21% vs. 41.4%, RR 0.929 (95% CI: 0.595, 1.448), P>0.05] were also similar between the two groups.

Conclusions

The progesterone protocol is comparable with the GnRH-ant protocol regarding oocyte/embryo yields and the probability of clinical pregnancy in PCOS patients, but the two regimens were distinct in the regulation of pituitary LH secretion.

Trial registration number

Chictr.org.cn: ChiCTR-IOR-15006633.

Effectiveness of progesterone-primed ovarian stimulation in assisted reproductive technology: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Purpose

Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) is a new ovarian stimulation protocol that has been used over the last decade to enhance reproductive function. The purpose of this study is to evaluate whether PPOS is as effective as conventional protocols (without GnRHa downregulation).

Method

Search terms included “medroxyprogesterone”, “dydrogesterone”, “progestin-primed ovarian stimulation”, “PPOS”, “oocyte retrieval”, “in vitro fertilization”, “IVF”, “ICSI”, “ART”, and “reproductive”. The selection criteria were nonrandomized studies and randomized controlled studies. For data collection and analysis, the Review Manager software, Newcastle–Ottowa Quality Assessment Scale and GRADE approach were used.

Results

The clinical pregnancy rates were not significantly different in either RCTs or NRCTs [RR 0.96, 95% CI (0.69–1.33), I² = 71%, P = 0.81]; [RR 0.99, 95% CI (0.83–1.17), I² = 38%, P = 0.88]. The live birth rates of RCTs and NRCTs did not differ [RCT: RR 1.08, 95% CI (0.74, 1.57), I² = 66%, P = 0.69; NRCT: OR 1.03 95% CI 0.84–1.26), I² = 50%, P = 0.79]. The PPOS protocol had a lower rate of OHSS [RR 0.52, 95% CI (0.36–0.75), I² = 0%, P = 0.0006]. The secondary results showed that compared to the control protocol, the endometrium was thicker [95% CI (0.00–0.78), I² = 0%, P = 0.05], the number of obtained embryos was higher [95% CI (0.04–0.65), I² = 17%, P = 0.03] and more hMG was needed [in NRCT: 95% CI (307.44, 572.73), I² = 0%, P < 0.00001] with the PPOS protocol.

Conclusion

The PPOS protocol produces more obtained embryos and a thicker endometrium than the control protocol, with a lower rate of OHSS and an equal live birth rate. The PPOS protocol could be a safe option as a personalized protocol for infertile patients.

Trial registration

Registration at PROSPERO: CRD42020176577.

Comparison of the effects of Duphaston and Cetrotide on oocyte and embryo quality in women undergoing ICSI: A cross-sectional study

Background

Premature luteinizing hormone (LH) surge is one of the causes for assisted reproductive technology cycle cancellation, and it is needed to find novel approaches with improved efficacy and safety profile.

Objective

To compare the effects of Duphaston and Cetrotide on the prevention of premature LH surge and characteristics of retrieved follicles and embryos in women undergoing intracytoplasmic sperm injection.

Materials and Methods

In this retrospective cross-sectional study, 200 patients who were administrated recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone from the third day of menstruation cycle were included. When the follicular diameter reached above 13-14 mm, Cetrotide was prescribed in the control group, while in the case group, Duphaston was taken orally from the third day of cycle. The retrieved oocytes were fertilized in vitro by intracytoplasmic sperm. The level of hormones on the third day of menstruation and the characteristic of follicles, oocytes, and embryos were compared between the two groups.

Results

Duphaston successfully inhibits premature LH surge. There was no significant difference in the level of follicle-stimulating hormone, estradiol, and LH between the case and control groups (p > 0.05). However, results also showed that Duphaston causes more oocyte retrieval in comparison with Cetrotide (p = 0.04). Although, the number of follicles above 14 mm, mature oocyte, and the total number of viable embryos in the case group was slightly higher, it did not reach a significant difference compared with the control group (p > 0.05).

Conclusion

Duphaston could be used as an appropriate medication instead of gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonists in women undergoing controlled ovarian hyperstimulation. Duphaston prescription not only prevents premature LH surge but also improves the number of retrieved oocytes.

Progestins for pituitary suppression during ovarian stimulation for ART: a comprehensive and systematic review including meta-analyses

BACKGROUND

Progestins are capable of suppressing endogenous LH secretion from the pituitary. Progestins can be used orally and are less expensive than GnRH analogues. However, early endometrial exposure to progestin precludes a fresh embryo transfer (ET), but the advent of vitrification and increasing number of oocyte cryopreservation cycles allow more opportunities for using progestins for pituitary suppression.

OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE

This review summarizes: the mechanism of pituitary suppression by progestins; the effectiveness of progestins when compared with GnRH analogues and with each other; the effect of progestins on oocyte and embryo developmental potential and euploidy status; and the cost-effectiveness aspects of progestin primed stimulation. Future research priorities are also identified.

SEARCH METHODS

The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE via PubMed, the Web of Science and Scopus were screened with a combination of keywords related to ART, progesterone, GnRH analogue and ovarian stimulation, in various combinations. The search period was from the date of inception of each database until 1 April 2020. Only full text papers published in English were included.

OUTCOMES

Overall, the duration of stimulation, gonadotrophin consumption and oocyte yield were similar with progestins and GnRH analogues. However, sensitivity analyses suggested that progestins were associated with significantly lower gonadotrophin consumption than the long GnRH agonist protocol (mean difference (MD) = -648, 95% CI = -746 to -550 IU) and significantly higher gonadotrophin consumption than the short GnRH agonist protocol (MD = 433, 95% CI = 311 to 555 IU). Overall, live birth, ongoing and clinical pregnancy rates per ET were similar with progestins and GnRH analogues. However, when progestins were compared with GnRH agonists, sensitivity analyses including women with polycystic ovary syndrome (risk ratio (RR) = 1.27, 95% CI = 1.06 to 1.53) and short GnRH agonist protocols (RR = 1.14, 95% CI = 1.02 to 1.28) showed significantly higher clinical pregnancy rates with progestins. However, the quality of evidence is low. Studies comparing medroxyprogesterone acetate, dydrogesterone and micronized progesterone suggested similar ovarian response and pregnancy outcomes. The euploidy status of embryos from progestin primed cycles was similar to that of embryos from conventional stimulation cycles. Available information is reassuring regarding obstetric and neonatal outcomes with the use of progestins. Despite the lower cost of progestins than GnRH analogues, the mandatory cryopreservation of all embryos followed by a deferred transfer may increase cost per live birth with progestins as compared to an ART cycle culminating in a fresh ET.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS

Progestins can present an effective option for women who do not contemplate a fresh ET, e.g. fertility preservation, anticipated hyper responders, preimplantation genetic testing, oocyte donors, double stimulation cycles.

Evaluating the Effect of Utrogestan on Idiopathic Intrauterine Growth Retardation

Background:

Intrauterine growth factor (IUGR) is one of the most important causes of neonatal mortality. The aim of this study was to evaluate the therapeutic effect of utrogestan on the treatment of IUGR and its complications.

Materials and Methods:

In this clinical trial, 66 pregnant women with idiopathic IUGR embryos were enrolled. Patients in the intervention group, in addition to receiving routine treatment of control group (high-protein diet, resting), took utrogestan capsules (100 mg) twice daily. The primary and secondary outcomes of the disease were recorded in a checklist. Data were analyzed using SPSS 18 using an independent t-test, Chi-square test, and Fisher's exact test.

Results:

In the intervention group, mean neonatal weight (P = 0.003), mean neonatal Apgar score (P = 0.001), and mean gestational age at birth (P = 0.001) were significantly higher than those in the control group. There was no neonatal death in the intervention group, whereas in the control group, four cases of neonatal death were observed (P = 0.03). In the majority of subjects in the intervention group, resistance index, and pulsatility index of the umbilical artery decreased (P = 0.002). The difference in abdominal circumference and gestational age in the intervention group decreased (P = 0.01). In the intervention group, the diastolic flow of the umbilical artery increased (P = 0.002).

Conclusion:

Utrogestan was effective as an inexpensive and effective way to treat IUGR and improve pregnancy outcomes.

Medroxyprogesterone acetate used in ovarian stimulation is associated with reduced mature oocyte retrieval and blastocyst development: a matched cohort study of 825 freeze-all IVF cycles

PURPOSE

To compare the effectivity of flexible-start medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) co-treatment ovarian stimulations (OS) with flexible-start gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH-ant) co-treatment OS, in blastocyst freeze-all IVF cycles.

METHOD

This matched cohort study was performed at a single IVF center. Study cycles were extracted from freeze-all IVF cycles performed between February 2015 and June 2018 with cycles grouped according to the co-treatment protocol (MPA and GnRH-ant groups) used. MPA cycles were matched 1:1 using antral follicle count, female age, infertility duration, and female body mass index, with GnRH-ant cycles, resulting in 825 matched cycles. MPA or CET co-treatment was started when leading follicles reached 11-12 mm.

RESULTS

Duration of OS was significantly longer, and total FSH dose was significantly higher in the MPA group. Numbers of mature oocytes retrieved were similar; however, the mature oocyte retrieval rate (83.8 vs. 97.1%; p < 0.001), number of blastocysts, blastocyst rate (36.4 vs. 41.4%; p < 0.001) and > 2 viable blastocyst rate were all significantly lower in the MPA group. The live birth (LB) per transfer rates (51.6 vs. 55.7%; p = 0.155) were similar; however, the LB rate per treatment was significantly lower (40.9 vs. 45.8%; p = 0.05). A linear regression included the OS co-treatment protocol (GnRH-ant; 1.4 (1.07-1.81); p = 0.013) in the final model to predict having > 2 viable blastocysts.

CONCLUSION

Flexible-start MPA co-treatment OS was as effective in freeze-all IVF cycles as GnRH-ant co-treatment, with similar LB per transfer rates; however, increased cycle cancellation and reduced blastocyst numbers reduced LB per treatment rates significantly.

Validating the Use of Corifollitropin Alfa in Progestin-Primed Ovarian Stimulation Protocol on Normal and High Responders by Comparing with Conventional Antagonist Protocol: A Retrospective Study

Our previous study showed a satisfactory reproductive outcome resulting from the patient-friendly ovarian stimulation protocol using long-acting follicle stimulation hormone (FSH) plus oral medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA). The present retrospective study aims to compare the efficacy of the patient-friendly ovarian stimulation protocol with that of the antagonist protocol on normal and high responders aged between 24 and 39 years in a tertiary fertility center in Taiwan. To prevent premature luteinizing hormone (LH) surge, oral MPA was given to patients in group 1 (n = 57), whereas antagonist protocol was applied to group 2 (n = 53). Duration and dosage of stimulation, number of injections and visits before trigger, incidence of premature LH surge, number of oocytes retrieved, fertilization rate, cleavage rate, rate of good embryos available, incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome, cumulative clinical pregnancy rate and live birth rate per retrieval were compared between groups. We conclude that our patient-friendly ovarian stimulation protocol with MPA demonstrates satisfactory stimulation and reproductive outcomes that are comparable to those of an antagonist protocol.

Dydrogesterone-primed ovarian stimulation is an effective alternative to gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol for freeze-all cycles in polycystic ovary syndrome

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effects of progestin-primed ovarian stimulation using dydrogesterone (DYD) and a gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol on cycle characteristics and pregnancy rates in freeze-all cycles in patients with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS).

METHODS

Medical records of PCOS patients who underwent freeze-all in vitro fertilization cycles between April 2017 and April 2019 at the Novafertil in vitro fertilization Center were retrospectively evaluated. The primary outcome measure was the incidence of premature luteinizing hormone surge. Secondary outcome measures were the total number of mature oocytes retrieved, fertilization rate, clinical pregnancy rates and ongoing pregnancy rates.

RESULTS

A total of 525 patients were included in the study. DYD-primed ovarian stimulation and a GnRH antagonist protocol were applied in 258 and 267 patients, respectively. The baseline parameters were similar between the two groups. The numbers of mature and fertilized oocytes were similar in the cetrorelix (CET) group and DYD group (11.43 ± 3.48 vs. 11.29 ± 4.34, respectively, P = 0.692; and 8.98 ± 2.93 vs. 8.62 ± 3.67, respectively, P = 0.208). Premature luteinization was rare in both groups, and the difference between the groups was not statistically significant (2.9% vs. 1.5%, respectively, P = 0.268). There was no significant difference in clinical pregnancy rate of the first frozen embryo transfer cycle between the DYG group and the CET group (56% [120/214] vs. 55.6% [113/203], respectively, P = 0.283). There were no significant differences in biochemical pregnancy rates, implantation rates, miscarriage rates or ongoing pregnancy rates between the two groups (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Dydrogesterone-primed ovarian stimulation seems to be an effective alternative to the GnRH antagonist protocol for freeze-all cycles in PCOS patients.

Progestogens in luteal support

Progestational agents are often prescribed to increase the clinical pregnancy rate in assisted reproduction. Progestogens affect implantation, cytokine balance, natural killer cell activity, arachidonic acid release and myometrial contractility. Progesterone production from the corpus luteum is essential for reproduction, but assisted reproductive technologies (ART) can impair luteal function. ART cycles can be classified into three, fresh cycles in which there may or may not be luteal insufficiency, agonist or antagonist cycles in which there is luteal insufficiency, and luteal support is essential, and donor cycles, in which there is no corpus luteum, and a luteal phase has to be created. However, there is no adequate diagnostic test for luteal insufficiency. This article summarises the effect of various progestogens, progesterone itself whether administered vaginally, intra-muscularly, rectally or subcutaneously, and the effect of the progestogen, dydrogesterone. The time of commencement and cessation of therapy are also discussed. Progestogens are also often used to treat threatened and recurrent miscarriage. In these patients progestogen supplementation may need to be prolonged. In threatened miscarriage, until after all bleeding stops, and in recurrent miscarriage, at least as long as the luteo-placental shift.

Comparison of euploidy rates of blastocysts in women treated with progestins or GnRH antagonist to prevent the luteinizing hormone surge during ovarian stimulation

STUDY QUESTION

Does the prevalence of euploid blastocysts differ between patients treated with progestin primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) and those treated with conventional ovarian stimulation?

SUMMARY ANSWER

The numbers of blastocysts and euploid blastocysts per patient and the number of euploid embryos per injected oocyte are similar for patients undergoing progestin-primed ovarian stimulation and for those undergoing conventional ovarian stimulation with GnRH antagonist.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

New approaches to ovarian stimulation have been developed based on the use of drugs administrable by mouth instead of via injections. Attention has been dedicated to progestins to block the LH surge. Previous data regarding the number of oocytes retrieved and the number of good-quality embryos generated in PPOS have demonstrated similar outcomes when compared to conventional ovarian stimulation, even if some concerns regarding the quality of embryos have been advanced.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

This is a prospective non-inferiority age-matched case–control study. In a period of 6 months, a total of 785 blastocysts from 1867 injected oocytes obtained from 192 patients were available for analysis.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Infertile women undergoing IVF and preimplanation genetic testing (PGT) cycles were included. Forty-eight patients were treated with PPOS, and for each of them three age-matched historical controls (n = 144) treated with a GnRH antagonist protocol were selected. PGT was performed according to next-generation sequencing technology.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

Basal characteristics were similar in the two groups; a substantial similarity of the main outcome measures in the two treatment groups has also been found. The rate of formation of euploid blastocysts per oocyte was 21% in both the two treatment groups. The percentage of patients with euploid embryos and the total number of euploid blastocysts per patient (median and interquartile range, IQR) in the PPOS group were 38.7 (25.5–52.9) and 2 (1.3–3.1), respectively. These figures were not significantly different in women treated with the GnRH antagonist protocol i.e. 42 (28–53.8) and 2.1 (1.3–2.9), respectively.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

This was a case–control study which may limit the reliability of the main findings.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Our results encourage the use of PPOS, especially for oocyte donation, for fertility preservation and for patients in which total freezing of embryos is foreseen, for those expected to be high responders or candidates for preimplantation genetic testing. However, studies aiming to investigate the effect of PPOS on the live birth rate are warranted.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S)

None.

Dose-Dependent Chlormadinone Acetate Can Suppress Premature LH Surge in Parallel with LH Value Reduction

Background: Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) protocol is reported as an alternative method of premature luteinizing hormone (LH) surge suppression. How much dosage of chlormadinone acetate (CMA), a synthetic progestin, is appropriate treatment for this phenomenon?

Methods: Retrospective case control study was performed at private assisted reproductive technology (ART) clinic in Japan. Collected data was 231 cycles in patients who underwent either PPOS protocol using 12, 6, 4, or 2 mg of CMA, groups 6C, 3C, 2C, and 1C, respectively (total, 113 cycles), or gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol, groups 6A, 3A, 2A, and 1A, respectively (total, 118 cycles). In the CMA group, CMA and human menopausal gonadotropin (hMG) or follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) were administered simultaneously beginning on menstrual cycle day 3. Serum P, E2, and LH were determined on the day of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) administration. Occurrence of premature LH surge was compared between two groups. Pregnancy outcomes were also calculated.

Results: Premature LH surge was completely suppressed in CMA groups 6C, 3C, and 2C. On the other hand, this phenomenon was detected in antagonist method groups (5.9%, 7/118). But spontaneous ovulation was not observed in any group, and clinical outcomes are equal to those of GnRH antagonist treatment.

Conclusions: Controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) using CMA can be an appropriate alternative progestin for PPOS protocol. Since CMA is an oral medication, this method can be easy to conduct and cost-effective compared with the antagonist method. From our observation, we suggest 4 mg/day of CMA can control the egg retrieval cycle without LH surge occurrence as in other PPOS methods.

Impacts of medroxyprogesterone acetate on oocytes and embryos: matched case-control study in women with stage III-IV ovarian endometriosis undergoing controlled ovarian hyperstimulation for in vitro fertilization

Background

This study investigated the effects of medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) on the oocytes and embryos in patients with advanced endometriosis who had a normal ovarian reserve and tubal infertility and received controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) and explored the characteristics and pregnancy outcomes in subsequent frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) cycles.

Methods

In this prospective controlled study, 150 advanced endometriosis patients involving 150 in vitro fertilisation/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI) cycles and 163 FET cycles and 150 age-matched tubal infertility patients requiring 150 IVF/ICSI cycles and 115 FET cycles were recruited. Patients with endometriosis were sub-grouped into surgery group (n=102) (they were diagnosed with ovarian endometriomas and underwent 102 IVF/ICSI and 115FET cycles) and aspiration group (n=48) [they had ovarian "chocolate" cysts (>3 cm) that were aspirated and underwent 48 IVF/ICSI and 74 FET cycles].

Results

Lower oocyte retrieval rate was noted in the endometriosis group than in the control group. Similar oocyte yield and peak estrogen (E₂) level were found in two groups. The rates of mature oocyte, fertilization, cleavage, high-quality embryo, viable embryo, cancellation, implantation, and clinical pregnancy were similar between two groups. A higher oocyte yield was observed in the EMS cyst group than in the surgery group.

Conclusions

The ovary response, oocytes, embryos and pregnancy outcome were not influenced by the advanced endometriosis and the use of MPA and also independent of endometrioma or cyst surgery.

Outcomes of fertility preservation in women with endometriosis: comparison of progestin-primed ovarian stimulation versus antagonist protocols

BACKGROUND

PPOS protocols, initially described for FP in women with cancer, have many advantages compared to antagonist protocols. PPOS protocols were not evaluated for women with endometriosis. The objective of the study was to describe fertility preservation outcomes in women with endometriosis and to compare an antagonist protocol with a Progestin-Primed Ovarian Stimulation (PPOS) protocol.

METHOD

We conducted a prospective cohort study associated with a cost-effectiveness analysis in a tertiary-care university hospital. The measured outcomes included the numbers of retrieved and vitrified oocytes, and direct medical costs. In the whole population, unique and multiple linear regressions analysis were performed to search for a correlation between individual characteristics and the number of retrieved oocyte.

RESULTS

We included 108 women with endometriosis who had a single stimulation cycle performed with either an antagonist or a PPOS protocol. Overall, 8.1 ± 6.6 oocytes were retrieved and 6.4 ± 5.6 oocytes vitrified per patient. In the multiple regression model, age (p = 0.001), prior ovarian surgery (p = 0.035), and anti-Mullerian hormone level (p = 0.001) were associated with the number of retrieved oocytes. Fifty-four women were stimulated with an antagonist protocol, and 54 with a PPOS protocol. A mean of 7.9 ± 7.4 oocytes were retrieved in the antagonist group and 8.2 ± 5.6 in the PPOS group (p = 0.78). A mean of 6.4 ± 6.4 oocytes were vitrified in the antagonist group and 6.4 ± 4.7 in the PPOS group (p = 1). In the cost-effectiveness analysis, the PPOS protocol was strongly dominant over the antagonist protocol.

CONCLUSION

Fertility preservation procedures are feasible and effective for patients affected by endometriosis. Antagonist and PPOS protocols were associated with similar results but the medico-economic analysis was in favor of PPOS protocols.

Effect of oral Utrogestan in comparison with Cetrotide on preventing luteinizing hormone surge in IVF cycles: A randomized controlled trial

Background

Oral progesterone is recommended as an alternative to gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists and antagonists to prevent luteinizing hormone (LH) surge in assisted reproductive technology (ART) cycles. However, there are little data regarding its use.

Objective

We aimed to compare the effect of oral Utrogestan and Cetrotide (a GnRH antagonist) on preventing LH surge in ART cycles.

Materials and Methods

In this randomized clinical trial, 100 infertile women undergoing ART who received recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) at 150-225 IU/day were randomly assigned to receive either Utrogestan 100 mg twice a day (case group) or GnRH antagonist protocol (control group) from cycle day 3 until the trigger day. Triggering was performed with 10,000 IU hCG) when there were at least three mature follicles. Viable embryos were cryopreserved for transfer in the next cycle for both groups. The number of oocytes retrieved and transferred embryos were compared between groups.

Results

The case group had significantly higher progesterone levels on triggering day, more follicles of >14 mm with higher maturity, and more oocytes retrieved with a higher rate of embryos transferred. A small increase in the pregnancy rate was observed in the case group, with no significant between-group differences. The most important result was the lack of premature LH surge in either group upon serum LH assessment on the triggering day.

Conclusion

Utrogestan is an alternative treatment that could reduce the LH surge rate and increase the ART outcomes including the number of oocytes retrieved and transferred embryos compared with GnRH agonists and antagonists

Progestins versus GnRH analogues for pituitary suppression during ovarian stimulation for assisted reproductive technology: a systematic review and meta-analysis

This systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies investigated whether progestins are as effective as gonadotrophin releasing hormone (GnRH) analogues for pituitary suppression in assisted reproduction. The primary outcome was live birth rate per woman. Secondary outcomes were live birth or ongoing pregnancy per woman and per embryo transfer, ongoing pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, numbers of oocytes and metaphase-two oocytes, duration of stimulation and gonadotrophin consumption. Adverse events included miscarriage, ectopic pregnancy and multiple pregnancy rates. The GRADE system was used to assess the quality of evidence. Seven studies involving a total of 2047 women were included. Three studies compared a progestin with a GnRH antagonist and four studies compared a progestin with a GnRH agonist. Most studies are non-randomized and report outcomes per embryo transfer, rather than per woman. Although progestins were similar to GnRH antagonists in effectiveness and safety parameters, they were associated with significantly higher live birth or ongoing pregnancy per embryo transfer compared with the short GnRH agonist protocol (RR 1.49, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.91). Progestin primed stimulation lasted significantly longer (mean difference 0.61 days, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.89) and required significantly more gonadotrophins (mean difference 433.2 IU, 95% CI 311.11 to 555.19) than the short GnRH agonist protocol, but the differences were clinically negligible. Safety parameters were similar between progestins and GnRH agonists. In conclusion, progestins can effectively prevent premature ovulation in assisted reproductive technology cycles. If larger and well-designed studies confirm these findings, progestins may be an effective and low-cost alternative to GnRH analogues when a fresh embryo transfer is not planned owing to a medical indication.

Efficacy of Different Progestins in Women With Advanced Endometriosis Undergoing Controlled Ovarian Hyperstimulation for in vitro Fertilization-A Single-Center Non-inferiority Randomized Controlled Trial

Object: Is it possible to use different progestins cotreatment with human menopausal gonadotrophin (hMG) in women with advanced endometriosis but normal ovulation during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) in vitro fertilization (IVF)? Whether different progestins treatments can be an alternative choice for women with severe endometriosis in considering IVF/ICSI treatment remains unknown? Design: Non-inferiority randomized clinical trial. Setting: Tertiary-care academic medical center. Population: Four hundred and fifty infertile patients with severe endometriosis undergoing IVF/ICSI between May 2016 and March 2017. Methods: Four hundred and fifty infertile patients with severe endometriosis undergoing IVF/ICSI were randomized to: medroxyprogesterone acetate +hMG; dydrogesterone +hMG; and progesterone +hMG. Ovulation was induced with a gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) and chorionic gonadotropin (hCG). Viable embryos were cryopreserved for later transfer. Main Outcome Measures: The primary endpoint outcome was the number of oocytes retrieved. Secondary indicators included the incidence of a premature surge in luteinizing hormone (LH), the number of viable embryos, and clinical pregnancy outcomes. Results: The number of oocytes retrieved was higher in the medroxyprogesterone acetate +hMG group than the two other groups (9.3 ± 5.7 vs. 8.0 ± 4.5 vs. 7.8 ± 5.2, P = 0.021). LH levels were suppressed after a 6-day progestin treatment in the medroxyprogesterone acetate +hMG and dydrogesterone +hMG groups, but there was a rebound of LH values in the progesterone +hMG group. No premature LH surge and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) occurred. No significant differences among the three groups were observed in fertilization and pregnancy outcomes. Conclusion: It is mandatory to point out that our conclusions are valid for patients with ovarian advanced endometriosis but normal ovarian functions. These results suggest three different progestins protocols are equivalent in terms of pregnancy outcomes for women with advanced endometriosis. PPOS protocol can be an alternative choice for women with severe endometriosis and normal ovarian reserve in IVF/ICSI treatment. These methods could be tested with other populations of women with endometriosis. Clinical Trial Registration: www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier:ChiCTR-OIN-16008529. Trial registration date: 2014-05-25. Date of first patient enrollment: May 2016.

The Future of Cryopreservation in Assisted Reproductive Technologies

Societal changes and the increasing desire and opportunity to preserve fertility have increased the demand for effective assisted reproductive technologies (ART) and have increased the range of scenarios in which ART is now used. In recent years, the "freeze-all" strategy of cryopreserving all oocytes or good quality embryos produced in an IVF cycle to transfer later-at a time that is more appropriate for reasons of medical need, efficacy, or desirability-has emerged as an accepted and valuable alternative to fresh embryo transfer. Indeed, improvements in cryopreservation techniques (vitrification) and the development of more efficient ovarian stimulation protocols have facilitated a dramatic increase in the practice of elective frozen embryo transfer (eFET). Alongside these advances, debate continues about whether eFET should be a standard treatment option available to the whole IVF population or if it is important to identify patient subgroups who are most likely to benefit from such an approach. Achieving successful outcomes in ART, whether by fresh or frozen embryo transfer, is influenced by a wide range of factors. As well as the efficiency of IVF and embryo transfer protocols and techniques, factors affecting implantation include maternal aging, sperm quality, the vaginal and endometrial microbiome, and peri-implantation levels of serum progesterone. The safety of eFET, both during ART cycles and on longer-term obstetric and neonatal outcomes, is also an important consideration. In this review, we explore the benefits and risks of freeze-all strategies in different scenarios. We review available evidence on the outcomes achieved with elective cryopreservation strategies and practices and how these compare with more traditional IVF cycles with fresh embryo transfers, both in the general IVF population and in subgroups of special interest. In addition, we consider how to optimize and individualize "freeze-all" procedures to achieve successful reproductive outcomes.

Late Follicular Phase Ovarian Stimulation Without Exogenous Pituitary Modulators

Introduction: A gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist is the most common modulator used to prevent the premature luteinizing hormone (LH) surge when ovarian stimulation was initiated in the late follicular phase. We aimed in this study to evaluate the feasibility of performing ovarian stimulation in the late follicular phase without the use of exogenous pituitary modulators. Methods: Data were retrospectively collected from 404 normo-ovulatory patients who underwent their first in vitro fertilization (IVF)/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) treatment in our department. One hundred sixteen subjects in the study group received ovarian stimulation when a dominant follicular diameter of ≥ 10 mm was confirmed by transvaginal ultrasonography after menstrual cycle day 6, which entailed a daily injection of gonadotropin until the trigger day, while 288 subjects in the control group received ovarian stimulation in the early follicular phase under a progesterone protocol. The primary outcome was the number of mature oocytes. Results: There was no statistical difference in the number of mature oocytes between the two groups (9.67 ± 5.33 in the study group vs. 9.38 ± 5.15 in the control group, P = 0.693). No secondary LH surges in the study group and no premature LH surges in the control group were found during ovarian stimulation. The good-quality embryo rate per oocyte retrieved showed no significant difference between the two groups (35.22 vs. 35.91%, P = 0.665). The clinical pregnancy rate per transfer was 54.55% in the study group and 56.48% in the control group (P = 0.718), and the implantation rate was similar between the two groups (36.94 vs. 37.77%, P = 0.829). Conclusions: Our study revealed that late follicular phase ovarian stimulation could be performed without an exogenous pituitary modulator.

Ovarian stimulation for freeze-all IVF cycles: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Freeze-all IVF cycles are becoming increasingly prevalent for a variety of clinical indications. However, the actual treatment objectives and preferred treatment regimens for freeze-all cycles have not been clearly established.

OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE

We aimed to conduct a systematic review of all aspects of ovarian stimulation for freeze-all cycles.

SEARCH METHODS

A comprehensive search in Medline, Embase and The Cochrane Library was performed. The search strategy included keywords related to freeze-all, cycle segmentation, cumulative live birth rate, preimplantation genetic diagnosis, preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy, fertility preservation, oocyte donation and frozen-thawed embryo transfer. We included relevant studies published in English from 2000 to 2018.

OUTCOMES

Our search generated 3292 records. Overall, 69 articles were included in the final review. Good-quality evidence indicates that in freeze-all cycles the cumulative live birth rate increases as the number of oocytes retrieved increases. Although the risk of severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) is virtually eliminated in freeze-all cycles, there are certain risks associated with retrieval of large oocyte cohorts. Therefore, ovarian stimulation should be planned to yield between 15 and 20 oocytes. The early follicular phase is currently the preferred starting point for ovarian stimulation, although luteal phase stimulation can be used if necessary. The improved safety associated with the GnRH antagonist regimen makes it the regimen of choice for ovarian stimulation in freeze-all cycles. Ovulation triggering with a GnRH agonist almost completely eliminates the risk of OHSS without affecting oocyte and embryo quality and is therefore the trigger of choice. The addition of low-dose hCG in a dual trigger has been suggested to improve oocyte and embryo quality, but further research in freeze-all cycles is required. Moderate-quality evidence indicates that in freeze-all cycles, a moderate delay of 2–3 days in ovulation triggering may result in the retrieval of an increased number of mature oocytes without impairing the pregnancy rate. There are no high-quality studies evaluating the effects of sustained supraphysiological estradiol (E2) levels on the safety and efficacy of freeze-all cycles. However, no significant adverse effects have been described. There is conflicting evidence regarding the effect of late follicular progesterone elevation in freeze-all cycles.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS

Ovarian stimulation for freeze-all cycles is different in many aspects from conventional stimulation for fresh IVF cycles. Optimisation of ovarian stimulation for freeze-all cycles should result in enhanced treatment safety along with improved cumulative live birth rates and should become the focus of future studies.

Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation vs mild stimulation in women with advanced age above 40: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have demonstrated that progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) protocol was a feasible and efficient method in in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycle. However, its application in women with advanced age has not been determined yet. The purpose of this study was to investigate its efficacy in women aged ≥40 years old.

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study included patients with ages of ≥40 years old at the time of ovarian stimulation. The embryonic and clinical outcome of mild stimulation and PPOS were compared. Primary outcome was top-quality embryo rate on day 3, and secondary outcome was clinical pregnancy rate.

RESULTS

Baseline characteristics of patients was similar in mild stimulation (122 cycles) and PPOS (47 cycles). No significant difference was found in the number of retrieved and mature oocytes and the fertilization and cleavage rates. Of interest, the rate of top-quality embryos was significantly higher in PPOS group (50.08% vs 33.29%, p = 0.015), with an increasing trend of viable embryo rate (73.55% vs 61.16%). A greater amount of gonadotropin was observed in PPOS group (2061.17 ± 1254.63 IU vs 1518.14 ± 547.25 IU, p < 0.05) in spite of comparable duration of stimulation. After FET cycle, no significant difference was found in the clinical pregnancy rates between mild stimulation (12.5%) and PPOS group (16.7%).

CONCLUSIONS

Higher percentage of top-quality embryos on Day 3 and comparable clinical pregnancy rate was obtained in PPOS protocol, which could be considered as a feasible ovarian stimulation protocol in women aged above 40 years old.

Desogestrel versus antagonist injections for LH suppression in oocyte donation cycles: a crossover study

To study whether ovarian response to corifollitropin among oocyte donors (OD) is different when oral desogestrel (DSG) is used to block the luteinizing hormone (LH) surge when compared to GnRH-antagonist use. This is a retrospective, cohort study at a private, university-based, IVF center including 35 OD. Patients underwent two stimulation cycles under corifollitropin alfa (CFT), one under an antagonist and another under DSG, between February 2015 and May 2017. In antagonist cycles, daily ganirelix was administered since a leading follicle reached 14 mm. In the DSG cycles, daily oral DSG was prescribed. The main outcome measure was oocytes retrieved. Compared to antagonist cycles, cycles under DSG received fewer injections (10.3 ± 2.8 vs. 5.0 ± 2.1, p < .001), nominally lower total supplementary gonadotropin dose (497.4 ± 338.9I U vs. 442.9 ± 332.8 IU, p=.45) with a lower total cost of medication (1018.6 ± 191.0€ vs. 813.8 ± 145.9€, p<.001). There were no differences in the total number of retrieved oocytes between groups (17.4 ± 7.5 vs. 18.6 ± 8.9, p=.34). In the corresponding oocyte recipients, clinical pregnancy rate was similar between groups: 52.0% vs. 58.6%, respectively (p=.78). ODs' stimulation's response under DSG is similar when compared to (17.4 ± 7.5 vs. 18.6 ± 8.9, p=.34) but associated with less injections and lower medication costs. The main advantage of this strategy is its simplicity, an aspect of utmost importance in the management of ODs.

Ovarian response in oocyte donation cycles under LH suppression with GnRH antagonist or desogestrel progestin: retrospective and comparative study

Here are investigated the serum hormones in ovarian stimulation cycles of oocyte donors (OD), under endogenous luteinizing hormone (LH) suppression with GnRH antagonist (antGnRH) vs. desogestrel (DSG) (progesterone-primed [PP]). OD underwent ovarian stimulation with gonadotropins at a private, university-based, infertility center between January 2017 and March 2018. Endogenous LH peak was controlled with either daily injections of antGnRH or with daily oral 75 mcg DSG (PP) until triggering. LH and progesterone were measured at trigger and the following day. A total of 404 OD cycles were included. There were no differences in age (26.7 ± 4.9 vs. 27.1 ± 4.8 years), AMH (3.7 ± 2.1 vs. 4.1 ± 2.7 ng/ml), and body mass index (BMI) (22.4 ± 2.8 vs. 22.1 ± 3.0 kg/m²) between PP and antGnRH groups, respectively. On the day of trigger, progesterone was lower in PP compared to antGnRH (0.9 ± 0.7, vs. 1.5 ± 1.2 ng/ml, p < .001), whereas no significant differences existed in estradiol or LH. On the day after trigger, lower progesterone in PP vs. antGnRH (10.8 ± 6.0 vs. 13.4 ± 7.9 ng/ml, p=.002) was observed. No differences were observed in the number of retrieved oocytes or the clinical pregnancies among recipients. Our study shows that endocrine response to DSG differs significantly as compared to antGnRH use for the control of endogenous LH without apparent impact on number of retrieved oocytes or the clinical pregnancies among recipients.

Neonatal outcomes and congenital malformations in children born after dydrogesterone application in progestin-primed ovarian stimulation protocol for IVF: a retrospective cohort study

Purpose

Dydrogesterone (DYG) has been demonstrated to be an alternative progestin in the progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) protocol with comparable oocyte retrieval and pregnancy outcomes. However, its safety regarding neonatal outcomes and congenital malformations is still unclear.

Patients and methods

This retrospective cohort study included 3556 live-born infants after in vitro fertilization and vitrified embryo transfer cycles using the DYG + human menopausal gonadotropin (hMG) protocol (n=1429) or gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH)-agonist short protocol (n=2127) from January 2014 to December 2017. Newborn information was gathered from standardized follow-up questionnaires and/or access to medical records within 7 days after birth. Associations between ovarian stimulation protocols and outcome measures were analyzed by binary logistic regression after adjusting for confounding factors.

Results

In both singletons and twins, birth characteristics regarding mode of delivery, newborn gender, gestational age, birthweight, length at birth and Z-scores were comparable between the two protocols. For adverse neonatal outcomes, the two protocols showed no significant differences on the rates of low birthweight, very low birthweight, preterm birth, very preterm birth, small-for-gestational age, large-for-gestational age and early neonatal death after adjustment. Furthermore, the incidence of major congenital malformations in the DYG + hMG protocol (1.12%) was similar to that in the GnRH-agonist short protocol (1.08%), with the adjusted odds ratio of 0.98 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.40–2.39) and 0.90 (95% CI: 0.33–2.41) in singletons and twins, respectively.

Conclusion

Our data suggested that compared with the conventional GnRH-agonist short protocol, application of DYG in the PPOS protocol was a safe option for the newborn population without compromising neonatal outcomes or increasing congenital malformation risks.