The Impact of Duostim Protocol on Pregnancy Outcomes in Infertile Patients: A Meta-analysis Comparing Single and Double Conventional Stimulation Cycles

Overview

Journal J Assist Reprod Genet

Publisher Springer

Specialties Genetics
Reproductive Medicine

Date 2024 Nov 27

PMID 39601990

Authors

Youman Zeng

Weiwu Liu

Yudi Luo

Bowen Luo

Lingling Zhu

Zengyu Yang

Keng Feng

Derong Li

Sheng-Ao Chen

Xiang Li

Affiliations

Soon will be listed here.

Abstract

Background: The DuoStim protocol has been proposed as an alternative to conventional single and double stimulation cycles in the treatment of infertility. However, its efficacy in improving pregnancy outcomes remains uncertain.

Objective: To systematically evaluate the impact of the DuoStim protocol on pregnancy outcomes in infertile patients by comparing it with single and double conventional stimulation cycles.

Methods: An online systematic search was conducted using PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE databases, covering the period from their inception to March 2024. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the DuoStim protocol with single and double conventional stimulation cycles in infertile patients were identified. Data were extracted by two independent investigators who screened the literature and assessed the quality of the studies. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4 software.

Results: A total of six RCTs involving 414 infertile patients were included. The DuoStim protocol significantly increased the total number of oocytes compared to single and double conventional stimulation (MD = - 1.47; 95% CI, - 2.12 to - 0.82; P < 0.00001). There were no statistically significant differences in the number of MII oocytes, total embryos, pregnancy rate, and live birth rate. Subgroup Analysis: compared to single stimulation, the DuoStim protocol significantly increased the number of MII oocytes (MD = 1.71; 95% CI, 0.77 to 2.66; P = 0.0004) and total embryos (MD = 1.34; 95% CI, 0.61 to 2.08; P = 0.0003). There were no significant differences in pregnancy rate and live birth rate. Secondary outcomes showed the effect of the DuoStim protocol in patients undergoing preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies (PGT-A). The time to obtain euploid blastocysts was significantly reduced in the DuoStim group compared to the control group (23.3 ± 2.8 days vs. 44.1 ± 2.0 days; P < 0.001).

Conclusions: The DuoStim protocol shows a significant advantage in increasing the total number of oocytes, MII oocytes, and embryos compared to single stimulation. However, it does not significantly improve pregnancy and live birth rates. The protocol also shortens the time to obtain euploid blastocysts in patients undergoing PGT-A, indicating potential benefits for specific patient groups. Further research is needed to confirm these findings and evaluate long-term outcomes. Thus, the quality of evidence should be considered moderate, warranting cautious interpretation of the results.

References

Sfakianoudis K, Pantos K, Grigoriadis S, Rapani A, Maziotis E, Tsioulou P . What is the true place of a double stimulation and double oocyte retrieval in the same cycle for patients diagnosed with poor ovarian reserve? A systematic review including a meta-analytical approach. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2019; 37(1):181-204. PMC: 7000611. DOI: 10.1007/s10815-019-01638-z. View

. The use of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A): a committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2018; 109(3):429-436. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2018.01.002. View

Puthur S, Tracey S, Gould D, Fitzgerald C . DuoStim protocol- a novel fertility preservation strategy for female oncology patients. Hum Fertil (Camb). 2023; 26(5):1361-1367. DOI: 10.1080/14647273.2023.2193907. View

Kale A, Kale A . Oocyte Quality and Blastocyst Formation Rate with Dual Stimulation in Patients Belonging to POSEIDON Groups 3 and 4: A Retrospective Comparative Study. J Obstet Gynaecol India. 2023; 73(1):57-61. PMC: 9984652. DOI: 10.1007/s13224-022-01703-1. View

Rubio C, Simon C, Vidal F, Rodrigo L, Pehlivan T, Remohi J . Chromosomal abnormalities and embryo development in recurrent miscarriage couples. Hum Reprod. 2003; 18(1):182-8. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deg015. View

Vaiarelli A, Cimadomo D, Argento C, Ubaldi N, Trabucco E, Drakopoulos P . Double stimulation in the same ovarian cycle (DuoStim) is an intriguing strategy to improve oocyte yield and the number of competent embryos in a short timeframe. Minerva Ginecol. 2019; 71(5):372-376. DOI: 10.23736/S0026-4784.19.04390-9. View

Tsampras N, Gould D, Fitzgerald C . Double ovarian stimulation (DuoStim) protocol for fertility preservation in female oncology patients. Hum Fertil (Camb). 2017; 20(4):248-253. DOI: 10.1080/14647273.2017.1287433. View

Vaiarelli A, Cimadomo D, Petriglia C, Conforti A, Alviggi C, Ubaldi N . DuoStim - a reproducible strategy to obtain more oocytes and competent embryos in a short time-frame aimed at fertility preservation and IVF purposes. A systematic review. Ups J Med Sci. 2020; 125(2):121-130. PMC: 7721001. DOI: 10.1080/03009734.2020.1734694. View

Labarta E . DuoStim: a new strategy proposed for women with poor ovarian response. Fertil Steril. 2020; 113(1):76-77. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.10.024. View

10.

Cumpston M, Li T, Page M, Chandler J, Welch V, Higgins J . Updated guidance for trusted systematic reviews: a new edition of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019; 10:ED000142. PMC: 10284251. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.ED000142. View

11.

Cerrillo M, Cecchino G, Toribio M, Garcia-Rubio M, Garcia-Velasco J . A randomized, non-inferiority trial on the DuoStim strategy in PGT-A cycles. Reprod Biomed Online. 2022; 46(3):536-542. DOI: 10.1016/j.rbmo.2022.11.012. View

12.

Neves A, Montoya-Botero P, Sachs-Guedj N, Polyzos N . Association between the number of oocytes and cumulative live birth rate: A systematic review. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2023; 87:102307. DOI: 10.1016/j.bpobgyn.2022.102307. View

13.

Higgins J, Altman D, Gotzsche P, Juni P, Moher D, Oxman A . The Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in randomised trials. BMJ. 2011; 343:d5928. PMC: 3196245. DOI: 10.1136/bmj.d5928. View

14.

Telfer E, Grosbois J, Odey Y, Rosario R, Anderson R . Making a good egg: human oocyte health, aging, and in vitro development. Physiol Rev. 2023; 103(4):2623-2677. PMC: 10625843. DOI: 10.1152/physrev.00032.2022. View

15.

Saharkhiz N, Salehpoor S, Hosseini S, Nazari L, Sheibani S, Doohandeh T . Comparison Fertilization Outcomes between DouStim and Minimal Stimulation Protocols in Poor Ovarian Responders: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Int J Fertil Steril. 2024; 18(2):135-139. PMC: 10875315. DOI: 10.22074/ijfs.2023.552687.1293. View

16.

Esteves S, Humaidan P, Roque M, Agarwal A . Female infertility and assisted reproductive technology. Panminerva Med. 2019; 61(1):1-2. DOI: 10.23736/S0031-0808.18.03553-X. View

17.

Zhu Q, Li Y, Ma J, Ma H, Liang X . Potential factors result in diminished ovarian reserve: a comprehensive review. J Ovarian Res. 2023; 16(1):208. PMC: 10598941. DOI: 10.1186/s13048-023-01296-x. View

18.

Ghahghayi F, Payandeh A, Najafian A, Ghasemi M, Jabari A . Investigating Ovulation Induction Outcomes in Patients with Decreased Ovarian Reserve Treated with Double Stimulation during The Follicular and Luteal Phases Compared to The Conventional Antagonist Cycle: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Int J Fertil Steril. 2024; 18(2):140-145. PMC: 10875316. DOI: 10.22074/ijfs.2023.1978181.1405. View

19.

Racca A, Rodriguez I, Garcia S, Arroyo G, Polyzos N . Double versus single stimulation in young low prognosis patients followed by a fresh embryo transfer: a randomized controlled trial (DUOSTIM-fresh). Hum Reprod. 2024; . DOI: 10.1093/humrep/deae104. View

20.

Sokteang S, Ou P, Tran C, de Ziegler D . Programming the onset of ovarian stimulation: from early follicular phase start to oral contraceptive pill, to luteal phase E2, Duostim, and random start oral contraceptive protocols. Fertil Steril. 2024; 123(1):22-30. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2024.09.011. View