The freeze-all strategy versus agonist triggering with low-dose hCG for luteal phase support in IVF/ICSI for high responders: a randomized controlled trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 35 (12) ◽  
pp. 2808-2818 ◽  
Author(s):  
Samuel Santos-Ribeiro ◽  
Shari Mackens ◽  
Biljana Popovic-Todorovic ◽  
Annalisa Racca ◽  
Nikolaos P Polyzos ◽  
...  

Abstract STUDY QUESTION Does the freeze-all strategy in high-responders increase pregnancy rates and improve safety outcomes when compared with GnRH agonist triggering followed by low-dose hCG intensified luteal support with a fresh embryo transfer? SUMMARY ANSWER Pregnancy rates after either fresh embryo transfer with intensified luteal phase support using low-dose hCG or the freeze-all strategy did not vary significantly; however, moderate-to-severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) occurred more frequently in the women who attempted a fresh embryo transfer. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY Two strategies following GnRH agonist triggering (the freeze-all approach and a fresh embryo transfer attempt using a low-dose of hCG for intensified luteal phase support) are safer alternatives when compared with conventional hCG triggering with similar pregnancy outcomes. However, these two strategies have never been compared head-to-head in an unrestricted predicted hyper-responder population. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION This study included women with an excessive response to ovarian stimulation (≥18 follicles measuring ≥11 mm) undergoing IVF/ICSI in a GnRH antagonist suppressed cycle between 2014 and 2017. Our primary outcome was clinical pregnancy at 7 weeks after the first embryo transfer. Secondary outcomes included live birth and the development of moderate-to-severe OHSS. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS Following GnRH agonist triggering, women were randomized either to cryopreserve all good-quality embryos followed by a frozen embryo transfer in an subsequent artificial cycle or to perform a fresh embryo transfer with intensified luteal phase support (1500 IU hCG on the day of oocyte retrieval, plus oral estradiol 2 mg two times a day, plus 200 mg of micronized vaginal progesterone three times a day). MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE A total of 212 patients (106 in each arm) were recruited in the study, with three patients (one in the fresh embryo transfer group and two in the freeze-all group) later withdrawing their consent to participate in the study. One patient in the freeze-all group became pregnant naturally (clinical pregnancy diagnosed 38 days after randomization) prior to the first frozen embryo transfer. The study arms did not vary significantly in terms of the number of oocytes retrieved and embryos produced/transferred. The intention to treat clinical pregnancy and live birth rates (with the latter excluding four cases lost to follow-up: one in the fresh transfer and three in the freeze-all arms, respectively) after the first embryo transfer did not vary significantly among the fresh embryo transfer and freeze-all study arms: 51/105 (48.6%) versus 57/104 (54.8%) and 41/104 (39.4%) versus 42/101 (41.6%), respectively (relative risk for clinical pregnancy 1.13, 95% CI 0.87–1.47; P = 0.41). However, moderate-to-severe OHSS occurred solely in the group that received low-dose hCG (9/105, 8.6%, 95% CI 3.2% to 13.9% vs 0/104, 95% CI 0 to 3.7, P < 0.01). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION The sample size calculation was based on a 19% absolute difference in terms of clinical pregnancy rates, therefore smaller differences, as observed in the trial, cannot be reliably excluded as non-significant. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS This study offers the first comparative analysis of two common strategies applied to women performing IVF/ICSI with a high risk to develop OHSS. While pregnancy rates did not vary significantly, a fresh embryo transfer with intensified luteal phase support may still not avoid the risk of moderate-to-severe OHSS and serious consideration should be made before recommending it as a routine first-line treatment. Future trials may allow us to confirm these findings. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose. No external funding was obtained for this study. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02148393. TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE 28 May 2014 DATE OF FIRST PATIENT’S ENROLMENT 30 May 2014

2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
M Safrai ◽  
S Hertsberg ◽  
A Be Meir ◽  
B Reubinoff ◽  
T Imbar ◽  
...  

Abstract Study question Can luteal oral Dydrogesterone (Duphaston) supplementation in an antagonist cycle after a lone GnRH agonist trigger rescue the luteal phase, allowing the possibility to peruse with fresh embryo transfer? Summary answer Functionality of the luteal phase in an antagonist cycle after a lone GnRH agonist trigger can be restored by adding Duphaston to conventional luteal support. What is known already Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) is dramatically reduced when using antagonist cycle with lone GnRH agonist trigger before ovum pick up. This trigger induces short luteinizing hormone (LH) and follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) peaks, associated with reduced progesterone and estrogen levels during the luteal phase. They cause an inadequate luteal phase and a significantly reduced implantation rate leading to a freeze all practice in those cycles. Study design, size, duration A retrospective cohort study. The study group (n = 123) included women that underwent in vitro fertilization cycles from January 2017 to May 2020. Patients received a GnRH-antagonist with a lone GnRH-agonist trigger due to imminent OSHH. The control group (n = 374) included patients under 35 years old that, during the same time period, underwent a standard antagonist protocol with a dual trigger of a GnRH-agonist and hCG. Participants/materials, setting, methods Study patients were given Dydrogesterone (Duphaston) in addition to micronized progesterone vaginal pills (Utrogestan) for luteal support (Duphaston group). Controls were treated conventionally with Utrogestan for luteal phase support (hCG group). The outcomes measured were pregnancy rate and OHSS events. Main results and the role of chance Our study was the first to evaluate the addition of Duphaston to standard luteal phase support in an antagonist cycle triggered by a lone GnRH agonist before a fresh embryo transfer. The mean number of oocytes retrieved and estradiol plasma levels were significantly higher in the Duphaston group than in the hCG group (16.9 ±7.7 vs. 10.8 ± 5.3 and 11658 ± 5280 pmol/L vs. 6048 ± 3059 pmol/L, respectively). The fertilization rate was comparable between the two groups. The mean number of embryos transferred and the clinical pregnancy rate were also comparable between groups (1.5 ± 0.6 vs 1.5 ± 0.5 and 46.3% vs 40.9%, respectively). No OHSS event was reported in either group. Limitations, reasons for caution This retrospective study may carry an inherent selection and information bias, derived from medical record coding. An additional limitation was the choice of physician for the lone GnRH trigger, which may have introduced a selection bias and another potential caveat was the relatively small sample size of our study groups. Wider implications of the findings: The addition of Duphaston to conventional luteal support could effectively salvage the luteal phase without increasing the risk for OHSS. This enables, to peruse in those cycle, with fresh embryo transfer, avoiding the need to freeze all the embryos and postponed embryo transfer. Leading to lower psychological burden and costs. Trial registration number 0632–20-HMO


Author(s):  
Maryam Eftekhar ◽  
Maryam Mirzaei ◽  
Esmat Mangoli ◽  
Yasamin Mehrolhasani

Background: The effect of adding gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist on the luteal phase support in assisted reproductive technique (ART) cycles is controversial. Objective: To determine the effects of adding multiple doses of GnRH agonist to the routine luteal phase support on ART cycle outcomes. Materials and Methods: This clinical trial study included 200 participants who underwent the antagonist protocol at the Research and Clinical Center for Infertility, Yazd, Iran, between January and March 2020. Of the 200, 168 cases who met the inclusion criteria were equally divided into two groups – the case and the control groups. Both groups received progesterone in the luteal phase, following which the case group received GnRH agonist subcutaneously (0/1 mg triptorelin) zero, three, and six days after the fresh embryo transfer, while the control group did not receive anything. Finally, chemical and clinical pregnancy rates, number of mature oocytes, fertilization rate, total dose of gonadotropin, and the estradiol level were determined. Results: The baseline characteristics were similar in both groups. No significant difference was observed between embryo transfer cycles. Clinical results showed that differences between the fertilization rate, chemical and clinical pregnancies were not significant. Conclusion: The results showed that receiving multiple doses of GnRH agonist in the luteal phase of ART cycles neither improves embryo implantation nor the pregnancy rates; therefore, further studies are required. Key words: Luteal phase, GnRH agonist, ART, Pregnancy rate.


Author(s):  
Robab Davar ◽  
Soheila Pourmasumi ◽  
Banafsheh Mohammadi ◽  
Maryam Mortazavi Lahijani

Background: The results of previous studies on the effect of low-dose aspirin in frozenthawed embryo transfer (FET) cycles are limited and controversial. Objective: To evaluate the effect of low-dose aspirin on the clinical pregnancy in the FET cycles. Materials and Methods: This study was performed as a randomized clinical trial from May 2018 to February 2019; 128 women who were candidates for the FET were randomly assigned to two groups receiving either 80 mg oral aspirin (n = 64) or no treatment. The primary outcome was clinical pregnancy rate and secondary outcome measures were the implantation rate, miscarriage rate, and endometrial thickness. Results: The endometrial thickness was lower in patients who received aspirin in comparison to the control group. There were statistically significant differences between the two groups (p = 0.018). Chemical and clinical pregnancy rates and abortion rate was similar in the two groups and there was no statistically significant difference. Conclusion: The administration of aspirin in FET cycles had no positive effect on the implantation and the chemical and clinical pregnancy rates, which is in accordance with current Cochrane review that does not recommend aspirin administration as a routine in assisted reproductive technology cycles. Key words: Aspirin, Embryo transfer, Pregnancy rates.


2016 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 68-72 ◽  
Author(s):  
K Muthukumar ◽  
TK Aleyamma ◽  
Sumi Thomas

ABSTRACT Controlled ovarian hyperstimulation, which is a key component of assisted reproductive technology (ART) treatment, can be excessive in certain cases and can lead to massive cystic enlargement of the ovaries and biochemical changes, leading to ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). Traditionally, human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) has been used as ovulation trigger in ART cycles but its sustained luteotrophic effect is associated with an increased risk of OHSS in high-risk patients. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist trigger can be used as an alternative to hCG in GnRH antagonist downregulated cycles. However, the use of GnRH agonist was associated with a lower pregnancy rate due to deficient luteal phase, and hence, use of low-dose hCG to rescue the deficient luteal phase has been used. Various studies showed that using lowdose hCG did not increase the risk of OHSS even in high-risk patients. Here, we present a case report of severe early-onset OHSS following GnRH agonist trigger with low-dose hCG. How to cite this article Thomas S, Kamath MS, Muthukumar K, Aleyamma TK. Severe Early-onset Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome following Use of GnRH Agonist Trigger along with Low-dose hCG. Int J Infertil Fetal Med 2016;7(2):68-72.


Author(s):  
Abbas Aflatoonian ◽  
Banafsheh Mohammadi

Background: Luteal-phase support is a complex and controversial issue in the field of reproductive management. Objective: To compare the safety and efficacy of low-dose subcutaneous progesterone with the vaginal progesterone for luteal-phase support in patients undergoing rozenthawed embryo transfer. Materials and Methods: In this cross-sectional study, information related to 77 women that had frozen-thawed embryo transfer was reviewed. The patients were divided into two groups based on the route of progesterone administration used as a luteal-phase support. When the endometrial thickness reached ≥ 8 mm, in one group progesterone (Prolutex) 25 mg/ daily subcutaneous and in another group, vaginal progesterone (Cyclogest®) 400 mg twice or (Endometrin®) 100 mg thrice daily, were administrated and continued until menstruation or in case of clinical pregnancy for 8 wk after the embryo transfer when the fetal heart activity was detected by ultrasonography. Results: The patient’s characteristics were matched and there was no significant difference. The chemical and clinical pregnancy rate was higher in the vaginal progesterone group compared to the prolutex group, but statistically unnoticeable, (40% vs. 29.6%, p = 0.367) and (28% vs. 22.2%, p = 0.581), respectively. C Conclusion: The findings of this study demonstrate that the new subcutaneous progesterone can be a good alternative for intramuscular progesterone in women that dislike and do not accept vaginal formulations as luteal-phase support in assisted reproductive technology. Key words: Progesterone, Subcutaneous, Vaginal, Pregnancy.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document