What should be the protocol selection after failure of in-vitro fertilization at normoresponder patients: Agonist or antagonist?

Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone (GnRH) Agonist Protocol Improves Pregnancy Outcomes During In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) and Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection (ICSI) Treatment in Young Infertile Women: A Retrospective Study

Objective The objective of this study was to determine if gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) or gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH-ant) protocols during in vitro fertilization (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) treatment in young infertile women improve their pregnancy outcomes. Methodology We retrospectively reviewed the records of 876 young infertile women aged 20-35 years who underwent fresh embryo transfer in IVF/ICSI cycles. The data were collected from their initial visits to the reproductive medicine center of the Second Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University between January 2019 and December 2022. We divided them into two groups according to the controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) protocols: GnRH-a (n = 580) and GnRH-ant (n = 296). The primary outcome assessed in this study was the live birth rate. The secondary observation indicators included the total dose and duration of gonadotropin (Gn), total embryo transfer, day three (D3) embryo transfer, total two pro-nuclei (2PN) cleavage count, number of fertilizations, and implantation rate. Results The live birth rate had no clinical significance (P > 0.05). The total dose and duration of Gn stimulation in the GnRH-ant group were lower than in the GnRH-a group (P  < 0.05). The total embryo transfer, D3 embryo transfer, total cleavage count, total 2PN cleavage count, number of fertilizations, transfer, and mature oocytes in metaphase II (MII) of D3 embryos in the GnRH-a group were higher than those in the GnRH-ant group (P  < 0.05). The clinical pregnancy rate and implantation rate of the GnRH-a group were higher than those of the control group. Conclusions The total embryo transfer, D3 embryo transfer, total cleavage count, total 2PN cleavage count, number of fertilizations, transfer and MII of D3 embryos, clinical pregnancy, and implantation rates were significantly higher in the GnRH-a protocol group. The total dosage of Gn and duration of Gn stimulation were lower in the GnRH-ant group than in the GnRH-a group. These findings provide the basis for the selection of the COH protocol in normal Chinese ovarian response patients undergoing IVF/ICSI.

Comparison of clinical outcomes between the depot gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist protocol and gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol in normal ovarian responders

BACKGROUND

The gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol has some advantages, such as a simple method, short medication duration, and low incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome, but whether the GnRH antagonist protocol is suitable for normal ovarian responders has been controversial. We compared the clinical outcomes of fresh and frozen-thawed transfer cycles between the depot GnRH agonist protocol and GnRH antagonist protocol in normal ovarian responders.

METHODS

Data of normal ovarian responders who underwent in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer (IVF-ET) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection-embryo transfer (ICSI-ET) between January 2017 and December 2018 in our hospital were retrospectively analysed. In this study, there were 1119 fresh transfer cycles, including 502 GnRH antagonist cycles (GnRH antagonist group) and 617 depot GnRH agonist cycles (depot GnRH agonist group), as well as 468 frozen-thawed transfer cycles, includng 191 GnRH antagonist cycles (GnRH antagonist group) and 277 depot GnRH agonist cycles (depot GnRH agonist group). The clinical outcomes were compared between the GnRH antagonist group and the depot GnRH agonist group.

RESULTS

With the fresh transfer cycles, there were no statistically significant differences in the anti-Mullerian hormone level, number of transferred embryos or high-quality embryo rate between the two groups. The total dosage of gonadotropin (Gn), duration of Gn stimulation, number of oocytes retrieved, clinical pregnancy rate and incidences of moderate and severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) were significantly lower but the abortion rate was significantly higher in the GnRH antagonist group than in the depot GnRH agonist group (all P < 0.05). With the frozen-thawed transfer cycles, there were no statistically significant differences in the number of transferred embryos, clinical pregnancy rate or abortion rate between the two groups (all P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

With the fresh transfer cycles, the GnRH antagonist protocol had a lower clinical pregnancy rate and lower incidences of moderate and severe OHSS than the depot GnRH agonist protocol, but with the frozen-thawed transfer cycles, both protocols had similar clinical pregnancy rates. These results remain to be further confirmed through large-sample, prospective, randomized and controlled studies.