Endometriosis and IVF: are agonists really better? Analysis of 1180 cycles with the propensity score matching

Evidence based management of patients with endometriosis undergoing assisted conception: British fertility society policy and practice recommendations

Endometriosis is a chronic inflammatory condition in women of reproductive age, which can lead to infertility and pelvic pain. Endometriosis associated infertility is multifactorial in nature adversely affecting each step of the natural reproductive physiology and thereby processes and outcomes of Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART) cycles. These outcomes are further complicated by the subtype of endometriosis, being peritoneal, deep infiltrating and ovarian, which bear negative effects on ovarian reserve, response to stimulation, accessibility for oocyte retrieval, intraoperative safety and endometrial receptivity. There is still a lack of clear guidance about the role of surgery for ovarian endometriosis/endometriomas. This guideline evaluates the evidence of the impact of pelvic endometriosis and endometriomas on the outcome of ART and provides recommendations for management options before and during ART including intra-uterine insemination. Recommendations are made based on the current evidence for the management of patients with endometriosis across each step of ART with the primary aim of improving ART outcomes.

Systematic review and meta-analysis on the effect of adjuvant gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) on pregnancy outcomes in women with endometriosis following conservative surgery

BACKGROUND

Endometriosis frequently results in pain and infertility. While conservative surgery offers some relief, it often falls short of ensuring satisfactory pregnancy outcomes. Adjuvant GnRH-a is administered post-surgery to mitigate recurrence; however, its impact on pregnancy outcomes remains debated. This study endeavors to assess the efficacy of adjuvant GnRH-a in enhancing pregnancy outcomes post-conservative surgery in endometriosis patients.

METHODS

Databases including PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Medline (Ovid), Web of Science, and Scopus were rigorously searched up to 02 August 2023, without linguistic constraints. Identified articles were screened using strict inclusion and exclusion criteria. Evaluated outcomes encompassed pregnancy rate, live birth rate, miscarriage rate, ectopic pregnancy rate, multiple pregnancy rate, mean postoperative pregnancy interval, recurrence rate, and adverse reaction rate. The Cochrane risk of bias tool and the Jadad score evaluated the included studies' quality. Subgroup and sensitivity analysis were implemented to analyze the pooled results. A meta-analysis model expressed results as standardized mean difference (SMD) and Risk ratio (RR).

RESULTS

A total of 17 studies about 2485 patients were assimilated. Meta-analysis revealed that post-surgery, the GnRH-a cohort experienced a marginally elevated pregnancy rate (RR = 1.20, 95% CI = 1.02-1.41; P = 0.03) and a reduced mean time to conceive (RR = -1.17, 95% CI = -1.70- -0.64; P < 0.0001). Contrarily, other evaluated outcomes did not exhibit notable statistical differences.

CONCLUSIONS

Incorporating adjuvant GnRH-a following conservative surgery may be deemed beneficial for women with endometriosis, especially before Assisted Reproductive Technology (ART). Nonetheless, owing to pronounced heterogeneity, subsequent research is warranted to substantiate these potential advantages conclusively.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42023448280.

Reproductive outcome after in vitro fertilization in endometriosis - key factors and implications

Endometriosis is a benign chronic disease with a major impact on a woman's quality of life, mainly due to painful physical symptoms. Endometriosis is also a common cause of infertility caused by low ovarian reserve, distorted pelvic anatomy, and severe local inflammation with a direct negative impact on the quality of oocytes, embryos, and endometrium. We conducted a retrospective study between January 2019 and December 2023, including women with a history of surgery for endometriosis who underwent in vitro fertilization (IVF) to achieve pregnancy. Their reproductive outcome was compared with a group of patients with documented tubal obstruction. The aim of our study was to identify the factors associated with a positive impact on the pregnancy rate, specifically age, anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH), ovarian stimulation protocol, and types of gonadotropins used. We analyzed a group of 175 patients with endometriosis compared with 189 patients with tubal obstruction. The average age was similar between the two groups but with a difference in the average AMH value (1.63 ± 1.09 ng/mL vs. 2.55 ± 1.67 ng/mL). The most utilized ovarian stimulation protocol in both groups was the short gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist. The clinical pregnancy rate was 27.2% in the endometriosis group and 54.7% in the tubal obstruction group. Our study revealed that treatment with corifollitropin alfa in the endometriosis group was associated with a higher clinical pregnancy rate. AMH and age proved to be significant independent factors for the reproductive outcome.

Ovarian Stimulation for In Vitro Fertilization and Reproductive Outcome after Surgical Treatment of Endometriosis Compared with Tubal Factor Infertility

Endometriosis is a common cause of infertility among reproductive-age women. A low ovarian reserve is associated with the presence of endometriotic cysts, and this is accentuated even more after surgery. Patients with a history of endometrioma are a special category of poor ovarian reserve requiring in vitro fertilization (IVF). The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the characteristics and outcome of ovarian stimulation and embryo transfer in women with a history of ovarian surgery for endometrioma compared with a control group with tubal factor infertility. A total of 146 patients had previous laparoscopic cystectomy for endometrioma (group A) and their IVF results were compared with 136 patients with documented tubal obstruction (group B). In both groups, the most frequently used ovarian stimulation protocol was the short antagonist in 84.24% versus 80.88%. The number of stimulation days was between 6 and 15 days in the two groups with a mean value of 12.76 days in group A and 9.47 days in group B. The clinical pregnancy rate was 26.77% in the endometrioma group and 39.68% in the tubal obstruction group. Patients with a history of endometrioma are less likely to conceive than those with tubal obstruction despite having similar ovarian reserve and stimulation results.

Comparing ART outcomes in women with endometriosis after GnRH agonist versus GnRH antagonist ovarian stimulation: a systematic review

Background

Endometriosis is an oestrogen-dependent disease that can cause subfertility in women who may require assisted reproductive technology (ART) to achieve their pregnancy goals.

Objectives

The aim of this study was to compare ART outcomes in women with endometriosis following the long GnRH-agonist controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) protocol with those taking the GnRH-antagonist COS protocol.

Data Sources and Methods

MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science were systematically searched in June 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing the long GnRH-agonist COS protocol and the GnRH-antagonist COS protocol in women with all stages/subtypes of endometriosis were included. Data were synthesized into comprehensive tables for systematic review. The Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) checklists were used for the risk of bias assessment of non-randomized studies and randomized studies, and all the included studies were deemed to have acceptable quality.

Main Results

Eight studies (one RCT and seven observational) with 2695 patients (2761 cycles) were included. Most studies generally reported non-significant differences in clinical pregnancy or live birth rates regardless of the COS protocol used. However, the GnRH-agonist protocol may yield a higher total number of oocytes retrieved, especially mature oocytes. Conversely, the GnRH-antagonist protocol required a shorter COS duration and lower gonadotrophin dose. Adverse outcomes, such as rates of cycle cancellation and miscarriage, were similar between both COS protocols.

Conclusion

Both the long GnRH-agonist and GnRH-antagonist COS protocols generally yield similar pregnancy outcomes. However, the long GnRH-agonist protocol may be associated with a higher cumulative pregnancy rate due to the higher number of retrieved oocytes available for cryopreservation. The underlying mechanisms of the two COS protocols on the female reproductive tract remain unclear. Clinicians should consider treatment costs, stage/subtype of endometriosis and pregnancy goals of their patients when selecting a GnRH analogue for COS. A well-powered RCT is needed to minimize the risk of bias and compare the risk for ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome.

Registration

This review was prospectively registered at PROSPERO under Registration No. CRD42022327604.

ESHRE guideline: endometriosis

STUDY QUESTION

How should endometriosis be diagnosed and managed based on the best available evidence from published literature?

SUMMARY ANSWER

The current guideline provides 109 recommendations on diagnosis, treatments for pain and infertility, management of disease recurrence, asymptomatic or extrapelvic disease, endometriosis in adolescents and postmenopausal women, prevention and the association with cancer.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Endometriosis is a chronic condition with a plethora of presentations in terms of not only the occurrence of lesions, but also the presence of signs and symptoms. The most important symptoms include pain and infertility.

STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION

The guideline was developed according to the structured methodology for development of ESHRE guidelines. After formulation of key questions by a group of experts, literature searches and assessments were performed. Papers published up to 1 December 2020 and written in English were included in the literature review.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING METHODS

Based on the collected evidence, recommendations were formulated and discussed within specialist subgroups and then presented to the core guideline development group (GDG) until consensus was reached. A stakeholder review was organized after finalization of the draft. The final version was approved by the GDG and the ESHRE Executive Committee.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

This guideline aims to help clinicians to apply best care for women with endometriosis. Although studies mostly focus on women of reproductive age, the guideline also addresses endometriosis in adolescents and postmenopausal women. The guideline outlines the diagnostic process for endometriosis, which challenges laparoscopy and histology as gold standard diagnostic tests. The options for treatment of endometriosis-associated pain symptoms include analgesics, medical treatments and surgery. Non-pharmacological treatments are also discussed. For management of endometriosis-associated infertility, surgical treatment and/or medically assisted reproduction are feasible. While most of the more recent studies confirm previous ESHRE recommendations, there are five topics in which significant changes to recommendations were required and changes in clinical practice are to be expected.

LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION

The guideline describes different management options but, based on existing evidence, no firm recommendations could be formulated on the most appropriate treatments. Also, for specific clinical issues, such as asymptomatic endometriosis or extrapelvic endometriosis, the evidence is too scarce to make evidence-based recommendations.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

The guideline provides clinicians with clear advice on best practice in endometriosis care, based on the best evidence currently available. In addition, a list of research recommendations is provided to stimulate further studies in endometriosis.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS

The guideline was developed and funded by ESHRE, covering expenses associated with the guideline meetings, with the literature searches and with the dissemination of the guideline. The guideline group members did not receive payments. C.M.B. reports grants from Bayer Healthcare and the European Commission; Participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board with ObsEva (Data Safety Monitoring Group) and Myovant (Scientific Advisory Group). A.B. reports grants from FEMaLE executive board member and European Commission Horizon 2020 grant; consulting fees from Ethicon Endo Surgery, Medtronic; honoraria for lectures from Ethicon; and support for meeting attendance from Gedeon Richter; A.H. reports grants from MRC, NIHR, CSO, Roche Diagnostics, Astra Zeneca, Ferring; Consulting fees from Roche Diagnostics, Nordic Pharma, Chugai and Benevolent Al Bio Limited all paid to the institution; a pending patent on Serum endometriosis biomarker; he is also Chair of TSC for STOP-OHSS and CERM trials. O.H. reports consulting fees and speaker's fees from Gedeon Richter and Bayer AG; support for attending meetings from Gedeon-Richter, and leadership roles at the Finnish Society for Obstetrics and Gynecology and the Nordic federation of the societies of obstetrics and gynecology. L.K. reports consulting fees from Gedeon Richter, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Dr KADE/Besins, Palleos Healthcare, Roche, Mithra; honoraria for lectures from Gedeon Richter, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Dr KADE/Besins, Palleos Healthcare, Roche, Mithra; support for attending meetings from Gedeon Richter, AstraZeneca, Novartis, Dr KADE/Besins, Palleos Healthcare, Roche, Mithra; he also has a leadership role in the German Society of Gynecological Endocrinology (DGGEF). M.K. reports grants from French Foundation for Medical Research (FRM), Australian Ministry of Health, Medical Research Future Fund and French National Cancer Institute; support for meeting attendance from European Society for Gynaecological Endoscopy (ESGE), European Congress on Endometriosis (EEC) and ESHRE; She is an advisory Board Member, FEMaLe Project (Finding Endometriosis Using Machine Learning), Scientific Committee Chair for the French Foundation for Research on Endometriosis and Scientific Committee Chair for the ComPaRe-Endometriosis cohort. A.N. reports grants from Merck SA and Ferring; speaker fees from Merck SA and Ferring; support for meeting attendance from Merck SA; Participation on a Data Safety Monitoring Board or Advisory Board with Nordic Pharma and Merck SA; she also is a board member of medical advisory board, Endometriosis Society, the Netherlands (patients advocacy group) and an executive board member of the World Endometriosis Society. E.S. reports grants from National Institute for Health Research UK, Rosetrees Trust, Barts and the London Charity; Royalties from De Gruyter (book editor); consulting fees from Hologic; speakers fees from Hologic, Johnson & Johnson, Medtronic, Intuitive, Olympus and Karl Storz; Participation in the Medicines for Women's Health Expert Advisory Group with Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA); he is also Ambassador for the World Endometriosis Society. C.T. reports grants from Merck SA; Consulting fees from Gedeon Richter, Nordic Pharma and Merck SA; speaker fees from Merck SA, all paid to the institution; and support for meeting attendance from Ferring, Gedeon Richter and Merck SA. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.

DISCLAIMER

This guideline represents the views of ESHRE, which were achieved after careful consideration of the scientific evidence available at the time of preparation. In the absence of scientific evidence on certain aspects, a consensus between the relevant ESHRE stakeholders has been obtained. Adherence to these clinical practice guidelines does not guarantee a successful or specific outcome, nor does it establish a standard of care. Clinical practice guidelines do not replace the need for application of clinical judgement to each individual presentation, nor variations based on locality and facility type. ESHRE makes no warranty, express or implied, regarding the clinical practice guidelines and specifically excludes any warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular use or purpose (Full disclaimer available at www.eshre.eu/guidelines.).

ART Outcomes After Hysteroscopic Proximal Tubal Occlusion Versus Laparoscopic Salpingectomy for Hydrosalpinx Management in Endometriosis Patients

The objective of this paper is to compare assisted reproductive technology (ART) cumulative live birth rates after hysteroscopic proximal tubal occlusion and laparoscopic salpingectomy in endometriosis patients, for management of hydrosalpinx. This is an observational cohort study at a university hospital, including all endometriosis patients with hydrosalpinges undergoing ART, between January 2013 and December 2018. The patients underwent either laparoscopic salpingectomy or hysteroscopic proximal tubal occlusion with Essure® when laparoscopy was not an option (extensive pelvic adhesions at exploratory laparoscopy or a history of multiple abdominal surgeries with frozen pelvis). The diagnosis of endometriosis was based on published imaging criteria using transvaginal sonography (TVUS) and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI). Endometriosis patients with hydrosalpinges diagnosed by hysterosalpingography and/or TVUS and/or MRI were included. The primary outcome was the cumulative live birth rate. A total of 104 patients were included in the study; 74 underwent laparoscopic salpingectomy and 30 underwent proximal tubal occlusion with Essure®. The Essure® group had longer infertility durations (58.9 ± 30.0 months vs. 39.5 ± 19.1 months, p = 0.002) and a higher incidence of associated adenomyosis (76.7% vs. 39.1%, p < 0.001) than the salpingectomy group. The cumulative live birth rate was 56.6% after 44 ART cycles in the Essure® group and 40.5% after 99 ART cycles in the salpingectomy group (p = 0.13). In a population of endometriosis patients undergoing ART, women treated by Essure® for management of hydrosalpinx have similar cumulative live birth rates as women treated by laparoscopic salpingectomy.

Assisted reproductive technology for women with endometriosis, a clinically oriented review

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To discuss optimal management of an assisted reproductive technology (ART) cycle in women with endometriosis.

RECENT FINDINGS

New studies involving euploid embryo transfers provide more insight on the etiology of endometriosis-associated infertility. Oocyte competence to reach live birth seems unlikely to be affected by the disease. Routine medical or surgical treatment prior to an ART cycle does not appear beneficial. Short gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist or progestin primed ovarian stimulation protocols seem to be proper first choices, depending on the intention for a fresh embryo transfer. Low-quality evidence supports frozen thawed over fresh embryo transfer. Ovarian stimulation for ART does not seem to be associated with symptom progression or recurrence.

SUMMARY

How endometriosis affects fertility is still unclear, but ART is an effective pragmatic treatment. Each woman with endometriosis must be assessed with a holistic approach, and in the absence of an indication for otherwise, ART cycles can be kept simple with patient-friendly protocols. Whether a frozen embryo transfer is better than a fresh one should be investigated.

Live-Birth Outcomes and Congenital Malformations After Progestin-Primed Ovarian Stimulation in Maternal Endometriosis

Purpose

In patients who had advanced endometriosis, we use different protocols including GnRH agonist, GnRH antagonist and progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) protocols to assess live-birth congenital malformations delivered after in vitro fertilization (IVF) and vitrified embryo transfer cycles.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study is conducted by us. It includes 1495 live-born infants in maternal endometriosis. From January 2010 to January 2017, we brought into infants who underwent either gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist long protocol, gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol or PPOS. We chose neonatal outcomes and congenital malformations as our major measures.

Results

Neonatal outcomes, as well as congenital malformations, were considered as the main measures, and gestational age, birth weight, birth length, multiple births and early neonatal death are included. All groups were comparable. The GnRH antagonist group (1.41%) and the GnRH antagonist protocol group (1.8%) had the same incidence of live-birth defects as the PPOS groups (1.33%) were similar. There were no apparent differences when it came to congenital malformations among the three groups. Multivariate logistic regression showed that infertility-time factors as well as multiple births combined to add the risk of congenital malformations; the adjusted odds were 1.143 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.988–1.323) and 3.253 (95% CI: 1.359–7.788). Besides, no association was found among various ovarian stimulations as well as congenital birth defect programs, maternal age, body mass index, parity or infant sex.

Conclusion

This study suggests that, in contrast to conventional ovarian stimulation, PPOS neither has any effect on neonatal outcomes in IVF adverse effects nor does it elevate the rate of congenital malformations in late endometriosis. However, randomized controlled trials of the long-term outcomes of children born after PPOS protocols for maternal endometriosis are needed and the follow-up studies were conducted to confirm this result.

Infertility in women with bowel endometriosis: first-line assisted reproductive technology results in satisfactory cumulative live-birth rates

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the assisted reproductive technology (ART) cumulative live-birth rate (LBR) in a cohort of bowel endometriosis patients with no prior history of surgery for endometriosis.

DESIGN

Prospective cohort study.

SETTING

University hospital.

PATIENT(S)

One hundred and one consecutive infertile bowel-endometriosis patients with no prior history of surgery for endometriosis in whom the diagnosis of endometriosis was based on published imaging criteria using transvaginal sonography and magnetic resonance imaging.

INTERVENTION(S)

First-line ART.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Cumulative LBR, with statistical analysis via Kaplan Meier method with a "conservative" method, whereby it was assumed that no live births took place for patients who did not return.

RESULT(S)

Between January 2016 and December 2018, 101 bowel endometriosis patients underwent 176 ART cycles. The mean number of deep-infiltrating endometriosis lesions per patient was 3 ± 0.9, with a mean number of bowel lesions of 1.3 ± 0.6. Seventy-three percent of the patients had associated endometriomas, and 88.1% had associated adenomyosis. Overall, the cumulative LBR after four ART cycles was 64.4%, using the conservative Kaplan-Meier method.

CONCLUSION(S)

The ART cumulative LBR was very satisfactory (64.4%) in bowel endometriosis patients with no prior history of surgery for endometriosis. In light of these data, clinicians should carefully weigh the pros and cons before systematically referring infertile bowel endometriosis patients to fertility-preserving surgery because as first-line ART appears to offer satisfactory results.

Post-operative management and follow-up of surgical treatment in the case of rectovaginal and retrocervical endometriosis

Introduction

Deep infiltrating endometriosis (DIE) affects between 3.8% and 37% of all endometriosis patients, mostly affecting rectovaginal septum or retrocervical space and characterized by the severe endometriosis-related complaints. Nowadays, generally managed with surgery. However, this is associated with a risk of postoperative complications. To better evaluate intra- and postoperative complications and outcomes for rectovaginal (RVE) and retrocervical endometriosis (RCE), the preoperative management should be accurately described and compared.

Methodology

This is a cohort retrospective study performed at the Endometriosis Centre of Charité-University Clinic, Berlin. 34 patients were investigated in their reproductive age, n = 19 with RVE and n = 15 RCE, operated between 2011 and 2015. The surgical approach was divergent in both groups. Single laparoscopy was performed in RCE patients (RCEP) and vaginal assisted laparoscopy in RVE patients (RVEP). Long-term postoperative outcome included complications, fertility rate and recurrence rate.

Results

The median follow-up time was three years (y). Symptom-free status was revealed in n = 12 RVEP and n = 9 RCEP. Postoperatively, endometriosis-related complaints were presented in n = 7 RVEP and n = 6 RCEP, but with significant pain relief. From n = 8 RVE patients seeking fertility, pregnancy occurred in n = 7 and from n = 9 RCEP pregnancy appeared in n = 5 patients in the meantime of 6 months. Postoperative complications were reported in n = 1 RVEP with early postoperative bleeding, after ureter leakage and n = 1 RCEP with postoperative anastomotic insufficiency. The postoperative recurrence rate was equivalent to zero.

Conclusion

The appropriate surgical approach for each group, preserving anatomy and functionality of the organs, seems to be very essential and efficient.

Rethinking mechanisms, diagnosis and management of endometriosis

Endometriosis is a chronic inflammatory disease defined as the presence of endometrial tissue outside the uterus, which causes pelvic pain and infertility. This disease should be viewed as a public health problem with a major effect on the quality of life of women as well as being a substantial economic burden. In light of the considerable progress with diagnostic imaging (for example, transvaginal ultrasound and MRI), exploratory laparoscopy should no longer be used to diagnose endometriotic lesions. Instead, diagnosis of endometriosis should be based on a structured process involving the combination of patient interviews, clinical examination and imaging. Notably, a diagnosis of endometriosis often leads to immediate surgery. Therefore, rethinking the diagnosis and management of endometriosis is warranted. Instead of assessing endometriosis on the day of the diagnosis, gynaecologists should consider the patient's 'endometriosis life'. Medical treatment is the first-line therapeutic option for patients with pelvic pain and no desire for immediate pregnancy. In women with infertility, careful consideration should be made regarding whether to provide assisted reproductive technologies prior to performing endometriosis surgery. Modern endometriosis management should be individualized with a patient-centred, multi-modal and interdisciplinary integrated approach.

Efficacy and Safety of In Vitro Fertilization (IVF)/Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection (ICSI) Among Patients with Endometriosis After a Shortened Protocol of Long-Term Pituitary Downregulation

BACKGROUND Patients with endometriosis (EMs) are routinely advised to take GnRH-a for 3-6 months to improve the internal reproductive environment, but this may not be necessary. MATERIAL AND METHODS This retrospective study examined the effects of in vitro fertilization (IVF)/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) with shortened (n=311) or conventional (n=213) long-term pituitary downregulation in EMs patients between January 2013 and July 2017. RESULTS The 2 groups showed no significant differences in gonadotropin (Gn) dose, number of oocytes retrieved, or miscarriage rate. Follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), luteinizing hormone (LH), and estradiol (E2) levels on the initiation day and the LH level on human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) day (1.22±1.39 vs. 0.74±0.55 P=0.0026) were higher in the study group than in the control group. The cumulative live birth rates in the second cycle were 69.13% in the study group (95% confidence interval (CI), 64-74.27%) vs. 68.54% in the control group (95% CI, 62.31-74.78%, P=0.88, respectively). CONCLUSIONS This study showed that the shortened regimen and the ultralong regimen did not produce different pregnancy outcomes after ART, and the single-application, long-term GnRH-a protocol may serve as a cost-effective and safe treatment protocol for EMs patients.

[Controlled ovarian stimulation protocols in endometriosis patients: with antagonist or agonist?]

OBJECTIVE

To compare laboratory and clinical outcomes of in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer (IVF-ET) in patients with endometriosis using antagonist protocol, long agonist protocol or prolonged agonist protocol.

METHODS

Totally 313 patients with endometriosis were recruited in Reproductive Centers of the Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhejiang University School of Medicine,Jiaxing Women and Children's Hospital,and Ningbo Women and Children's Hospital from April 2017 to October 2018, including 81 patients treated with antagonist protocol (antagonist group), 148 treated with long agonist protocol (long agonist group) and 84 treated with prolonged agonist protocol (prolonged agonist group). The clinical and laboratory data of the patients were retrospectively analyzed to investigate the effect of ovarian stimulation protocols on the IVF-ET outcomes of patients with endometriosis.

RESULTS

The average age in the antagonist group patients was significantly higher than those in the other two groups (all P<0.05),and anti-mullerian hormone (AMH) level and antral follicle numbers were significantly lower than those in the other two groups (all P<0.01). The numbers of average retrieved oocyte, fertilized oocyte and available embryo in the antagonist group were significantly lower than those in the long agonist group (all P<0.05), but were similar with those in the prolonged agonist group (all P>0.05). Fertilization rate and available embryo rate were comparable among the three groups (all P>0.05). Considering analysis per cycle with embryo transfer, the human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG) positive rate, clinical pregnancy rate and total implantation rate showed no significant difference among the three groups (all P>0.05). The implantation rate after fresh embryo transfer in the antagonist group was lower than that in the long agonist group (P<0.05), but was similar with that in the prolonged agonist group (P>0.05). While the implantation rate of freeze-thaw embryo transfer showed a higher trend in the antagonist group, but there was no significant difference (P>0.05). The patients were further divided into diminished and normal ovarian reserve subgroups, the per cycle with embryo transfer, the HCG positive rate, clinical pregnancy rate and total implantation rate still showed no significant difference between two subgroups (all P>0.05), no matter in which ovarian stimulation protocol groups. Besides, in women with diminished ovarian reserve, the available embryo rate in antagonist group was significantly higher than that in the long agonist group (P<0.05). The amount and duration of Gn application in antagonist group were significantly lower than those in long and prolonged agonist groups (all P<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with endometriosis who used the antagonist protocol in IVF procedure could reduce the cost and time of Gn treatment, when combined with frozen-embryo transfer strategy the antagonist protocol has comparable clinical pregnancy outcome with long or prolonged agonist protocol, especially in those with diminished ovarian reserve, the higher available embryo rate can be achieved.

Analysis of embryo quality with luteal phase ovarian stimulation after failed in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer with long or ultra-long protocol

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the effect of luteal phase ovarian stimulation on embryo quality after failed in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer with long or ultra-long protocol.

METHODS

In patients who underwent luteal phase ovarian stimulation after failed in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer with long or ultra-long protocol in the reproductive center between January 2015 and October 2017, self-control observations and statistical analyses were carried out for the number of oocytes retrieved, the rate of fertilization, the rate of D3 high-quality embryos, the rate of transplantable blastocyst formation, and the pregnancy rate of transfer cycle between long or ultra-long protocol and luteal phase ovarian stimulation.

RESULTS

The rate of fertilization and blastocyst were significantly increased after luteal phase ovarian stimulation (P < 0.05). However, the difference of the number of oocytes retrieved and the rate of D3 high-quality embryos was not statistically significant (p > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The patients who failed with long protocol or ultra-long protocol due to low quality embryos, the protocol changed over to luteal phase ovarian stimulation. Can significantly improve the rate of fertilization oocytes and the transplantable blastocyst, and improve the outcome of clinical pregnancy. It provides an alternative ovarian stimulation protocol in patients with IVF-ET failure.

Effect of Maternal Advanced Endometriosis on Risk of Congenital Malformations for Infants Born After in vitro Fertilization and Frozen-Thawed Embryo Transfer: Analysis of 28,600 Newborns

Background: Endometriosis is one of the most challenging diseases for doctors helping infertile women conceive, which has become a common method to help maternal endometriosis-associated infertility. Women with advanced endometriosis possess a higher risk of several adverse outcomes both during pregnancy and at the time of delivery. Whether endometriosis gives rise to a higher occurrence of congenital abnormalities in infants via in vitro fertilization and frozen-thawed embryo transfer (IVF-ET) remains unknown. Methods: Data collected on 22,865 women undergoing IVF using a freeze-all strategy from 2007 to 2017 were analyzed to estimate the rate of congenital malformations. We used an adjusted OR to compare the fertility outcomes of women with advanced endometriosis to the control group. Results: We studied 1,495 infants born from women with advanced endometriosis and 27,105 infants born from endometriosis-free women. There was a 1.557-fold risk that the infants with advanced maternal endometriosis would develop a congenital malformation (adjusted OR: 1.557, 95% CI: 1.03-2.35). Compared with singletons, twins were 1.957 times more likely to experience an adverse outcome (OR: 1.957, 95% CI: 1.561-2.455). When analyzing specific categories of birth defects, the proportion of circulatory system defects was higher than the other categories of birth defects in total (0.56%), followed by musculoskeletal system defects (0.15%). Conclusions: Maternal advanced endometriosis might increase the risk of congenital malformations for infants born after IVF-ET. The organ system most frequently affected by congenital malformations was the cardiovascular system, followed by the musculoskeletal system.

Does the type of GnRH analogue used, affect live birth rates in women with endometriosis undergoing IVF/ICSI treatment, according to the rAFS stage?

Since the introduction of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists, an extensive amount of literature investigating the role of the downregulation protocols on pregnancy outcomes has been published. However, these studies were mainly performed in the general infertile population where patients with endometriosis were often excluded or underrepresented. This study is a large retrospective cohort study including 386 endometriosis patients undergoing IVF/ICSI, who had been previously classified according to the rAFS system. Patients were stimulated either a long GnRH agonist or GnRH antagonist protocol. Depending on endometriosis stage, patients were divided into two groups: endometriosis stage I-II and endometriosis stage III-IV. Each group was subdivided, based on the type GnRH analog used. When comparing the GnRH agonist and antagonist groups, patients with endometriosis stage I-II, had a tendency toward higher β-hCG positive, clinical pregnancy, and live birth rates (42.8% vs. 26.7%; p = .07) in favor of GnRH agonist use. In endometriosis stage III-IV, no differences were observed between agonist and antagonist cycle in any of the pregnancy outcomes. Multivariate regression analysis did not reveal any significant predictor of live birth after adjusting for relevant confounders. Based on our findings, the chance to have a liveborn in endometriosis population seems not to be affected by the type of GnRH analog used, at least in advanced stages. Findings from stage I-II endometriosis cases merit consideration and further evaluation in a larger sample size is warranted.

[Management by assisted reproductive technology in women with endometriosis: CNGOF-HAS Endometriosis Guidelines]

Should the presence of endometriosis change the management of assisted reproductive technology? There is no difference in pregnancy rate after IVF between an agonist or antagonist protocol in patients with endometriosis, so the choice between one or the other of these protocols is free. But the review of the literature has shown an improvement in the chances of pregnancy in case of prolonged ovulation suppression before stimulation for IVF with a GnRH agonist analogue or with oral contraception, especially in cases of severe endometriosis. Endometriosis, regardless of the stage and type of lesions, would have no effect on the IVF results in terms of pregnancy rate and live birth rate, but with a lower number of oocytes collected, especially in cases of severe endometriosis. In a context of superficial endometriosis without pain and of infertility, surgical treatment of superficial endometriosis is not recommended just to increase the chances of pregnancy in IVF. Surgery may have a place in case of failure of IVF to improve the results of the ART. In case of recurrence of endometriosis, surgery is not better than IVF, a medico-surgical concertation is recommended. In addition, studies on ovulation stimulation for IVF do not show any aggravation of the symptoms associated with endometriosis lesions, or an acceleration of its progression, or an increase in the rate of recurrence of the disease.

[IVF and endometriosis, oocyte donation and fertility preservation]

Endometriosis is a common condition, causing pain and infertility. In infertile woman with superficial peritoneal endometriosis and patent tubes, laparoscopy is recommended, followed by ovarian stimulation alone or in combination with intrauterine inseminations. In case of ovarian or deep endometriosis, the indications of surgery and assisted reproductive technologies remain to be defined precisely. In vitro fertilization is generally proposed after the failure of up to three inseminations, directly for ovarian or deep endometriosis, or in case of an associated factor of infertility, mainly male. Before ovarian stimulation in view to in vitro fertilization, a pretreatment by GnRH agonist for 2 to 6 months or combined contraceptive for 6 to 8 weeks would improve the pregnancy rate. Egg donation is effective in patients with advanced ovarian failure or lack of ovarian response to stimulation. Fertility preservation, especially by oocytes vitrified, must be proposed preventively to women with endometriosis at risk of ovarian failure, without close wish to be pregnant.

Pregnancy outcomes after controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in women with endometriosis-associated infertility: GnRH-agonist versus GnRH-antagonist

BACKGROUND OR OBJECTIVE

Endometriosis is common in women referred for infertility. In vitro fertilization provides good results but the choice of the best-controlled ovarian hyperstimulation protocol remains a subject of debate. The objective of this retrospective study was to compare pregnancy outcomes in women with endometriosis-associated infertility after COH with a long agonist protocol or a six-week oral contraception-antagonist protocol.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Retrospective analysis of a prospective database identified 284 COH cycles - 165 with GnRH-agonist protocol (GnRH-agonist group) and 119 with GnRH-antagonist protocol (GnRH-antagonist group) - in 218 women, with endometriosis from January 2013 to October 2015.

RESULTS

No difference in the epidemiological characteristics was found between the groups. Per started cycle, pregnancy and live-birth rates after fresh embryo transfer were higher with the GnRH-agonist protocol (25% vs. 13%, P=0.02 and 18% vs. 8%, P=0.04, respectively). Considering analysis per cycle with embryo transfer, the pregnancy rate was similar in both groups while the live-birth rate was higher in the GnRH-agonist group (29% vs. 17%, P=0.053 and 22% vs. 10%, P=0.02, respectively). No difference was observed between the groups with freeze-thaw embryo transfer. Subgroup analysis (endometrioma alone, deep infiltrating endometriosis with and without endometrioma, endometriosis with and without adenomyosis) revealed no difference between the groups for either pregnancy or live-birth rates.

CONCLUSION

A GnRH-agonist protocol appears to result in higher pregnancy and live-birth rates after fresh embryo transfer in women with endometriosis-associated infertility, suggesting that a GnRH-antagonist protocol might negatively impact endometrial receptivity.

Prognostic factors for assisted reproductive technology in women with endometriosis-related infertility

BACKGROUND

Assisted reproductive technology is one of the therapeutic options offered for managing endometriosis-associated infertility. Yet, published data on assisted reproductive technology outcome in women affected by endometriosis are conflicting and the determinant factors for pregnancy chances unclear.

OBJECTIVE

We sought to evaluate assisted reproductive technology outcomes in a series of 359 endometriosis patients, to identify prognostic factors and determine if there is an impact of the endometriosis phenotype.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a retrospective observational cohort study, including 359 consecutive endometriosis patients undergoing in vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection, from June 2005 through February 2013 at a university hospital. Endometriotic lesions were classified into 3 phenotypes-superficial peritoneal endometriosis, endometrioma, or deep infiltrating endometriosis-based on imaging criteria (transvaginal ultrasound, magnetic resonance imaging); histological proof confirmed the diagnosis in women with a history of surgery for endometriosis. Main outcome measures were clinical pregnancy rates and live birth rates per cycle and per embryo transfer. Prognostic factors of assisted reproductive technology outcome were identified by comparing women who became pregnant and those who did not, using univariate and adjusted multiple logistic regression models.

RESULTS

In all, 359 endometriosis patients underwent 720 assisted reproductive technology cycles. In all, 158 (44%) patients became pregnant, and 114 (31.8%) had a live birth. The clinical pregnancy rate and the live birth rate per embryo transfer were 36.4% and 22.8%, respectively. The endometriosis phenotype (superficial endometriosis, endometrioma, or deep infiltrating endometriosis) had no impact on assisted reproductive technology outcomes. After multivariate analysis, history of surgery for endometriosis (odds ratio, 0.14; 95% confidence ratio, 0.06-0.38) or past surgery for endometrioma (odds ratio, 0.39; 95% confidence ratio, 0.18-0.84) were independent factors associated with lower pregnancy rates. Anti-müllerian hormone levels <2 ng/mL (odds ratio, 0.51; 95% confidence ratio, 0.28-0.91) and antral follicle count <10 (odds ratio, 0.27; 95% confidence ratio, 0.14-0.53) were also associated with negative assisted reproductive technology outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The endometriosis phenotype seems to have no impact on assisted reproductive technology results. An altered ovarian reserve and a previous surgery for endometriosis and/or endometrioma are associated with decreased pregnancy rates.

Comparison of ovulation induction protocols after endometrioma resection

Background and Objectives:

The aim of this study was to compare the in vitro fertilization (IVF) outcomes of long gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) and GnRH-antagonist (GnRH-ant) protocols in endometriosis patients who have undergone laparoscopic endometrioma resection surgery. To our knowledge, there is no study in the current literature that compares the effectiveness of long GnRH-a and GnRH-ant protocols in management of IVF cycles in endometriosis patients who underwent laparoscopic endometrioma resection surgery.

Methods:

Eighty-six patients with stage III to IV endometriosis who had undergone laparoscopic resection surgery for endometrioma were divided into 2 groups: those who had ovarian stimulation with a long GnRH-a protocol (n = 44), and those who had ovarian stimulation with a GnRH-ant protocol (n = 42).

Results:

The number of follicles on human chorionic gonadotropin injection day, duration of hyperstimulation, number of retrieved metaphase II oocytes, and total number of grade 1 embryos were statically significantly higher in the long GnRH-a protocol. There were no significant differences in positive β-human chorionic gonadotropin pregnancy rates (25% vs 21.4%; P = .269) and ongoing pregnancy rates per patient (20.5% vs 19.1%; P = .302) between the 2 protocols.

Conclusions:

Long GnRH-a and GnRH-ant protocols both present similar IVF outcomes in patients with endometriosis who have undergone laparoscopic endometrioma resection surgery. A long GnRH-a protocol may lead to a higher number of embryos that can be cryopreserved, providing the possibility of additional embryo transfers without having to go through the process of ovarian stimulation again.

Clinical management of endometriosis-associated infertility

Endometriosis is a common chronic benign disease that affects reproductive age women and causes chronic pelvic pain and infertility. Despite its prevalence, the exact mechanisms of the pathogenesis of endometriosis-associated infertility are unknown, and precise standards of management have not yet been established. Medical and surgical treatments for endometriosis have different effects on the chance of conception, either spontaneously or via assisted reproductive technologies (ART). In this manuscript, we review the literature from years 1979 to 2015 to report on the proposed mechanism of endometriosis-associated infertility, the staging system of endometriosis for pregnancy outcomes and the current management of patients with endometriosis-associated infertility.

Impact of endometriosis and its staging on assisted reproduction outcome: systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether the presence or severity of endometriosis affects the outcome of assisted reproductive techniques (ART).

METHODS

In this systematic review, all studies comparing the outcome of ART in women with and those without endometriosis, or at different stages of the disease, were considered eligible. We used either risk ratio (RR) or mean difference (MD) and their 95%CIs for comparisons. The primary outcome was live birth; the secondary outcome was clinical pregnancy. Miscarriage and the number of oocytes retrieved were examined as additional outcomes.

RESULTS

We included 92 studies in the review and 78 in the meta-analysis: 20,167 women with endometriosis were compared with 121,931 women without endometriosis, and 1703 women with Stage-III/IV endometriosis were compared with 2227 women with Stage-I/II endometriosis. The following results were observed for the comparison of women with endometriosis vs women without endometriosis: live birth, RR = 0.99 (95%CI, 0.92-1.06); clinical pregnancy, RR = 0.95 (95%CI, 0.89-1.02); miscarriage, RR = 1.31 (95%CI, 1.07-1.59); number of oocytes retrieved, MD = -1.56 (95%CI, -2.05 to -1.08). The following results were observed for the comparison of women with Stage-III/IV vs Stage-I/II endometriosis: live birth, RR = 0.94 (95%CI, 0.80-1.11); clinical pregnancy, RR = 0.90 (95%CI, 0.82-1.00); miscarriage, RR = 0.99 (95%CI, 0.73-1.36); number of oocytes retrieved, MD = -1.03 (95%CI, -1.67 to -0.39).

CONCLUSIONS

Women with endometriosis undergoing ART have practically the same chance of achieving clinical pregnancy and live birth as do women with other causes of infertility. No relevant difference was observed in the chance of achieving clinical pregnancy and live birth following ART when comparing Stage-III/IV with Stage-I/II endometriosis. The quality of the evidence for the additional examined outcomes was very low, not allowing meaningful conclusions to be drawn.

Molecular aspects of development and regulation of endometriosis

Endometriosis is a common and painful condition affecting women of reproductive age. While the underlying pathophysiology is still largely unknown, much advancement has been made in understanding the progression of the disease. In recent years, a great deal of research has focused on non-invasive diagnostic tools, such as biomarkers, as well as identification of potential therapeutic targets. In this article, we will review the etiology and cellular mechanisms associated with endometriosis as well as the current diagnostic tools and therapies. We will then discuss the more recent genomic and proteomic studies and how these data may guide development of novel diagnostics and therapeutics. The current diagnostic tools are invasive and current therapies primarily treat the symptoms of endometriosis. Optimally, the advancement of "-omic" data will facilitate the development of non-invasive diagnostic biomarkers as well as therapeutics that target the pathophysiology of the disease and halt, or even reverse, progression. However, the amount of data generated by these types of studies is vast and bioinformatics analysis, such as we present here, will be critical to identification of appropriate targets for further study.