The Effect of Flexible Low-dose GnRH Antagonist on Pregnancy Outcome in the Fresh Embryo Transfer Cycle of IVF-ET: a Randomized Controlled Trial

Overview

Journal Reprod Biol Endocrinol

Publisher Biomed Central

Specialties Endocrinology
Reproductive Medicine

Date 2022 Mar 23

PMID 35317821

Authors

Liping Feng

Ruiqi Fan

Aifang Jiang

Junyi Jiang

Qian Wang

Yujun Sun

Pengyun Qiao

Chune Ren

Tingting Yang

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Objective: To explore the practicality and effectiveness of a flexible low-dose protocol in the fresh embryo transfer cycle: reducing the total amount of antagonist by increasing the interval between administrations of Cetrotide.

Methods: A total of 211 patients with normal ovarian reserve who accepted GnRH-ant protocol for IVF-ET were selected, and they were randomized to the flexible low-dose antagonist group (test group, n = 101) or the conventional dose antagonist group (control group, n = 110). The initial dose of Cetrotide in the test group was 0.25 mg every other day, and then the dose was adjusted to 0.25 mg every day based on the subsequent luteinizing hormone (LH) levels. The dosage of Cetrotide in the control group was 0.25 mg per day. The primary outcome was the clinical pregnancy rate. Secondary outcomes included the incidence of premature LH rise, total dosage of Cetrotide, number of oocytes retrieved, number of fertilized oocytes, number of high-quality embryos, biochemical pregnancy rate and ongoing pregnancy rate.

Results: There was no significant difference in the general condition of the two groups. There was no significant difference in the clinical pregnancy rate (51.49% vs. 48.18%, p = 0.632) or the incidence of premature LH rise (18.81% vs. 15.45%, p = 0.584) between the two groups. However, the amount of Cetrotide used in the test group was significantly lower than that in the conventional dose antagonist group (1.13 ± 0.41 vs. 1.61 ± 0.59 mg, p < 0.001).

Conclusion: The flexible low-dose antagonist protocol and the conventional dose antagonist protocol were equally effective in people with a normal ovarian reserve in the fresh embryo transfer cycle of IVF-ET.

Citing Articles

Reproductive outcomes in fresh transfer cycles and antagonists with premature luteinizing and/or progesterone surge: a single center retrospective cohort study.

Wei C, Zhang J, Xiang S, Lian F Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2024; 15:1411106.

PMID: 39381441 PMC: 11458468. DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2024.1411106.

Impact of growth hormone on IVF/ICSI outcomes and endometrial receptivity of patients undergoing GnRH antagonist protocol with fresh embryo transfer: a pilot study.

Chu Y, Wang L, Xie J, Yang S, Liu S, Hu D Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2023; 14:1225121.

PMID: 37727454 PMC: 10506076. DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2023.1225121.

References

Kasius A, Smit J, Torrance H, Eijkemans M, Mol B, Opmeer B . Endometrial thickness and pregnancy rates after IVF: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2014; 20(4):530-41. DOI: 10.1093/humupd/dmu011. View

Xu B, Zhou M, Wang J, Zhang D, Guo F, Si C . Increased AIF-1-mediated TNF-α expression during implantation phase in IVF cycles with GnRH antagonist protocol. Hum Reprod. 2018; 33(7):1270-1280. PMC: 6012176. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dey119. View

Chen Q, Chai W, Wang Y, Cai R, Zhang S, Lu X . Progestin vs. Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Antagonist for the Prevention of Premature Luteinizing Hormone Surges in Poor Responders Undergoing Fertilization Treatment: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2019; 10:796. PMC: 6882854. DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2019.00796. View

Bosch E, Broer S, Griesinger G, Grynberg M, Humaidan P, Kolibianakis E . Erratum: ESHRE guideline: ovarian stimulation for IVF/ICSI. Hum Reprod Open. 2021; 2020(4):hoaa067. PMC: 7770487. DOI: 10.1093/hropen/hoaa067. View

Al-Inany H, Youssef M, Ayeleke R, Brown J, Lam W, Broekmans F . Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonists for assisted reproductive technology. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2016; 4:CD001750. PMC: 8626739. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001750.pub4. View

Zhang D, Xia L, Xu H, Chen Q, Jin B, Zhang A . Flexible Low-Dose GnRH Antagonist Protocol Is Effective in Patients With Sufficient Ovarian Reserve in IVF. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2019; 9:767. PMC: 6305714. DOI: 10.3389/fendo.2018.00767. View

Durnerin C, Erb K, Fleming R, Hillier H, Hillier S, Howles C . Effects of recombinant LH treatment on folliculogenesis and responsiveness to FSH stimulation. Hum Reprod. 2007; 23(2):421-6. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dem388. View

Armijo O, Egea G, Martin-Camean M, Lobo S, Sanz C, Iniesta S . Effects of progesterone variation on IVF Progesterone variation during controlled ovarian stimulation: effects on in vitro results. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2019; 40(6):825-829. DOI: 10.1080/01443615.2019.1671817. View

Secilmis Kerimoglu O, Ercan C, Keskin U, Korkmaz C, Duru N, Ergun A . Effect of a low dose of gonadotropin releasing hormone antagonist on in vitro fertilization outcomes. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2013; 288(3):691-5. DOI: 10.1007/s00404-013-2806-z. View

10.

Martinez F, Barri P, Coroleu B, Tur R, Sorsa-Leslie T, Harris W . Women with poor response to IVF have lowered circulating gonadotrophin surge-attenuating factor (GnSAF) bioactivity during spontaneous and stimulated cycles. Hum Reprod. 2002; 17(3):634-40. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/17.3.634. View

11.

Venetis C, Kolibianakis E, Bosdou J, Tarlatzis B . Progesterone elevation and probability of pregnancy after IVF: a systematic review and meta-analysis of over 60 000 cycles. Hum Reprod Update. 2013; 19(5):433-57. DOI: 10.1093/humupd/dmt014. View

12.

Comhaire F, Messiaen A, Decleer W . A mathematical model predicting the individual outcome of IVF through sperm-analysis: The role of the HaloSpermG2® DNA fragmentation test. Med Hypotheses. 2018; 117:50-53. DOI: 10.1016/j.mehy.2018.05.021. View

13.

Timeva T, Shterev A, Kyurkchiev S . Recurrent implantation failure: the role of the endometrium. J Reprod Infertil. 2014; 15(4):173-83. PMC: 4227974. View

14.

Labarta E, Martinez-Conejero J, Alama P, Horcajadas J, Pellicer A, Simon C . Endometrial receptivity is affected in women with high circulating progesterone levels at the end of the follicular phase: a functional genomics analysis. Hum Reprod. 2011; 26(7):1813-25. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/der126. View

15.

La Marca A, Sunkara S . Individualization of controlled ovarian stimulation in IVF using ovarian reserve markers: from theory to practice. Hum Reprod Update. 2013; 20(1):124-40. DOI: 10.1093/humupd/dmt037. View

16.

. Prevention and treatment of moderate and severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome: a guideline. Fertil Steril. 2016; 106(7):1634-1647. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.08.048. View

17.

Drakopoulos P, Racca A, Errazuriz J, De Vos M, Tournaye H, Blockeel C . The role of progesterone elevation in IVF. Reprod Biol. 2019; 19(1):1-5. DOI: 10.1016/j.repbio.2019.02.003. View

18.

Zhu H, Liu L, Yang L, Xue Y, Tong X, Jiang L . The effect of progesterone level prior to oocyte retrieval on the numbers of oocytes retrieved and embryo quality in IVF treatment cycles: an analysis of 2,978 cycles. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2014; 31(9):1183-7. PMC: 4156951. DOI: 10.1007/s10815-014-0291-3. View

19.

Chuang C, Chen C, Chao K, Chen S, Ho H, Yang Y . Age is a better predictor of pregnancy potential than basal follicle-stimulating hormone levels in women undergoing in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 2003; 79(1):63-8. DOI: 10.1016/s0015-0282(02)04562-4. View

20.

Messinis I, Messini C, Anifandis G, Garas A, Daponte A . Gonadotropin Surge-Attenuating Factor: A Nonsteroidal Ovarian Hormone Controlling GnRH-Induced LH Secretion in the Normal Menstrual Cycle. Vitam Horm. 2018; 107:263-286. DOI: 10.1016/bs.vh.2018.01.002. View