8. COMPARISON OF NATURAL CYCLES VERSUS HORMONE REPLACEMENT TREATMENT FOR 2398 FROZEN–THAWED EMBRYO TRANSFER CYCLES FOR PREIMPLANTATION GENETIC TESTING PATIENTS

2019 ◽  
Vol 39 ◽  
pp. e31
Author(s):  
Y. Fu ◽  
X. Shen ◽  
C. Zhou
2011 ◽  
Vol 95 (6) ◽  
pp. 2125.e15-2125.e17 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiao-Mei Tong ◽  
Hai-Yan Zhu ◽  
Feng Zhou ◽  
Qiong-Xiao Huang ◽  
Ling-Ying Jiang ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 34 (8) ◽  
pp. 1479-1484
Author(s):  
Zhao Jing ◽  
Huang Xi ◽  
Zeng Qianling ◽  
Sun Lunquan ◽  
Liu Nenghui ◽  
...  

Abstract STUDY QUESTION Does oestrogen dose tapering during the luteal phase affect the clinical outcome after hormone replacement treatment–frozen-thawed embryo transfer (HRT-FET) cycles? SUMMARY ANSWER Our results suggest that tapering oestrogen doses during the luteal phase results in similar clinical outcomes to those obtained with the traditional luteal phase support (LPS). WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Traditional LPS with oestrogen and progesterone is considered necessary in HRT-FET cycles. However, case reports have shown successful clinical pregnancies and live births in the absence of oestrogen administration after embryo transfers. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION This was a retrospective study on 6035 HRT-FET cycles extending over 7 years from January 2011 to June 2018 at the reproductive medicine centre of Xiangya Hospital. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS We compared the clinical outcomes of 1632 HRT-FET cycles with tapered oestrogen doses from 12 days after embryo transfer (study group) to those of 4403 HRT-FET cycles maintained on constant oestrogen doses during the luteal phase (control group) in the case of positive serum HCG test. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE We found similar biochemical pregnancy rates (52.1% vs. 51.9, P = 0.864), clinical pregnancy rates (44.9% vs. 43.2%, P = 0.249), implantation rates (29.8% vs. 29.3%, P = 0.591) and miscarriage rates (16.0% vs. 14.6%, P = 0.379) between the studied groups. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION Retrospective, design-associated biases are possible. In addition, some baseline characteristics differed between groups. Finally, we did not compare live birth rates between groups. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS Our study showing similar outcomes between traditional LPS and oestrogen tapering during the luteal phase indicates that oestrogen may be cautiously tapered during the luteal phase after HRT-FET cycles. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grant no. 81401269) and the class General Financial Grant from the China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (grant no. 2017M620360). The authors declare that they have no competing interests. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER N/A


2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Xitong Liu ◽  
Juanzi Shi ◽  
Haiyan Bai ◽  
Wen Wen

Abstract Background The ideal protocols of endometrial preparation for polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) patients are lacking and need further declaration. Our objective was to compare the clinical outcomes of frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) with and without pretreatment gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) in PCOS patients. Methods In this retrospective cohort study, we used propensity score matching (PSM) to compare the live birth rate between patients who underwent FET with hormone replacement treatment (HRT) and patients with GnRHa pretreatment (GnRHa + HRT). Patients using GnRHa + HRT (n = 514) were matched with 514 patients using HRT. Results The live birth rate was higher in the GnRHa + HRT group compared with the HRT group with no significant difference (60.12% vs 56.03%, p = 0.073). The clinical pregnancy rate (75.29% vs 70.62%), miscarriage rate (14.20% vs 13.81%) and ectopic pregnancy rate (0.39% vs 0.19%) were similar between the two groups. The preterm birth rate in GnRHa + HRT was higher than HRT (20.23% vs 13.04%). No difference was found in live birth between GnRHa +HRT and HRT before adjusting for covariates (crude OR 1.22, 95%CI, 0.99–1.51, p = 0.062) and after PSM (OR 1.47, 95%CI, 0.99–2.83, p = 0.068). In addition, there is a marginally difference after adjusting for covariates (aOR 1.56, 95%CI, 1.001–2.41, p = 0.048), this finding with p-value close to 0.05 represent insufficient empirical evidence. Similar results were obtained after propensity score matching in the entire cohort. Conclusions GnRHa pretreatment could not improve the live birth rate in women with PCOS.


2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuan Li ◽  
Xiaofeng Li ◽  
Jingnan liao ◽  
Xiangxiu Fan ◽  
Yongbin Hu ◽  
...  

Abstract Background: Displacement of the window of implantation (WOI) has been proposed as an important factor contributing to RIF. However, histologic dating of the endometrium as a diagnostic tool of endometrial receptivity has been questioned. Methods: This is a prospective intervention trial that entailed 205 infertile patients from July 2017 to December 2017. Endometrial biopsies from 50 good-prognosis patients were conducted on day 3 (n=6), 5 (n=6), 7 (n=26), 9 (n=6) or 11 (n=6) post-ovulation (PO+3/5/7/9/11) of the previous natural cycle before their conventional frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) cycle. We conducted endometrial biopsies of 155 RIF patients on day PO +7. Results: The verification of the Noyes criteria for endometrial dating was conducted at different times (PO +3/+5/+7/+9/+11) on 41 good-prognosis patients who achieved an ongoing pregnancy in their first conventional FET cycle after endometrial biopsy. The agreement between two pathologists for endometrial biopsy dating in infertile patients was determined to be acceptable (weighted kappa = 0.672, P < 0.001). The rate of out-of-phase dating on day PO+7 was significantly higher in RIF patients than good- prognosis patients (31.6% vs . 3.8%, P=0.003). pFET was performed in 47 RIF patients diagnosed to be out of phase, and the cumulative live-birth rate was 61.7%. Conclusions: Histologic endometrial dating of RIF patients in natural cycles may be a biomarker for a receptive endometrium in diagnosing the displacement of WOI.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document