scholarly journals Contribution to More Patient-Friendly ART Treatment: Efficacy of Continuous Low-Dose GnRH Agonist as the Only Luteal Support—Results of a Prospective, Randomized, Comparative Study

2015 ◽  
Vol 2015 ◽  
pp. 1-10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Céline Pirard ◽  
Ernest Loumaye ◽  
Pascale Laurent ◽  
Christine Wyns
Keyword(s):  
Gnrh Agonist ◽  
Luteal Phase ◽  
Pregnancy Rates ◽  
Human Menopausal Gonadotropin ◽  
Luteal Support ◽  
Luteal Phase Support ◽  
Parallel Group ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B ◽  
Estradiol Levels

Background. The aim of this pilot study was to evaluate intranasal buserelin for luteal phase support and compare its efficacy with standard vaginal progesterone in IVF/ICSI antagonist cycles.Methods. This is a prospective, randomized, open, parallel group study. Forty patients underwent ovarian hyperstimulation with human menopausal gonadotropin under pituitary inhibition with gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist, while ovulation trigger and luteal support were achieved using intranasal GnRH agonist (group A). Twenty patients had their cycle downregulated with buserelin and stimulated with hMG, while ovulation trigger was achieved using 10,000 IU human chorionic gonadotropin with luteal support by intravaginal progesterone (group B).Results. No difference was observed in estradiol levels. Progesterone levels on day 5 were significantly lower in group A. However, significantly higher levels of luteinizing hormone were observed in group A during the entire luteal phase. Pregnancy rates (31.4% versus 22.2%), implantation rates (22% versus 15.4%), and clinical pregnancy rates (25.7% versus 16.7%) were not statistically different between groups, although a trend towards higher rates was observed in group A. No luteal phase lasting less than 10 days was recorded in either group.Conclusion. Intranasal administration of buserelin is effective for providing luteal phase support in IVF/ICSI antagonist protocols.

Salivary oestradiol and progesterone after in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer using different luteal support regimens

1990 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 351 ◽  
Author(s):  
YF Wong ◽  
EP Loong ◽  
KR Mao ◽  
PP Tam ◽  
NS Panesar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
In Vitro Fertilization ◽  
Embryo Transfer ◽  
Luteal Phase ◽  
Biologically Active ◽  
Luteal Support ◽  
Vitro Fertilization ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B ◽  
Ivf Et

Salivary oestradiol (E2) and progesterone (P) levels have been shown to reflect the biologically active fractions in the serum. The luteal-phase status of stimulated cycles was investigated after in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF-ET). Thirty patients were randomly allocated to one of three luteal therapy groups: group A had no support, group B had intramuscular P and group C had intramuscular P and human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG). One pregnancy was achieved in group A, two in group B and three in group C. Significant correlations between salivary and serum levels of E2 and of P in matched samples during luteal phase were found. Salivary E2 levels from luteal day 8 through day 14 and P levels from day 3 through day 14 were significantly higher in the pregnant than in the nonpregnant cycles. Among the nonpregnant cycles, salivary E2 and P levels were significantly higher in group C than in group A or B. These findings suggest that, in stimulated cycles for IVF-ET, determination of salivary E2 and P levels may be used as reliable alternatives to serum concentrations for assessing the luteal phase. Also, the additional hCG has an enhanced luteotrophic effect, as reflected by the higher salivary E2 and P levels, which may lead to a better pregnancy rate.

P–667 Dydrogesterone supplementation in cycles triggered with lone GnRH agonist for final oocyte maturation resulted in an acceptable pregnancy rate

2021 ◽  
Vol 36 (Supplement_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
M Safrai ◽  
S Hertsberg ◽  
A Be Meir ◽  
B Reubinoff ◽  
T Imbar ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Pregnancy Rate ◽  
Embryo Transfer ◽  
Gnrh Agonist ◽  
Luteal Phase ◽  
Fresh Embryo Transfer ◽  
Luteal Support ◽  
Luteal Phase Support ◽  
Gnrh Agonist Trigger ◽  
The Mean ◽  
Agonist Trigger

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

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 ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Embryo Transfer ◽  
Gnrh Agonist ◽  
Luteal Phase ◽  
Low Dose ◽  
Pregnancy Rates ◽  
Clinical Pregnancy ◽  
Fresh Embryo Transfer ◽  
Luteal Phase Support ◽  
Low Dose Hcg ◽  
Severe Ohss

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

scholarly journals PREGNANCY RATE FOLLOWING LUTEAL PHASE SUPPORT IN POLYCYSTIC OVARY WOMEN USING LETROZOLE WITH OR WITHOUT GONADOTROPIN AS OVULATION INDUCTION

2018 ◽  
Vol 11 (9) ◽  
pp. 321
Author(s):  
Fadia J Alizzi
Keyword(s):  
Pregnancy Rate ◽  
Luteal Phase ◽  
Ovulation Induction ◽  
Polycystic Ovary ◽  
Primary Outcome Measure ◽  
Luteal Phase Support ◽  
Randomized Clinical Study ◽  
Group A ◽  
The Difference ◽  
Group B

Objective: The objective of the study was to evaluate the effect of luteal phase progesterone supplementation on pregnancy rates in anovulatory infertile polycystic ovary women using letrozole with or without gonadotropin as ovulation induction (OI).Method: A prospective randomized clinical study conducted in the infertility clinic - Al-Yarmouk Teaching Hospital, Baghdad/Iraq from June 2016 to January 2018. A total of 149 infertile polycystic ovary women who achieved ovulation using letrozole alone or with gonadotropin as OI protocol enrolled. Accordingly, the study group divided into two: Group A (letrozole group, no=99) and Group B (letrozole gonadotropin group, no=50). After triggering with human Chorionic Gonadotropin, the women in each group were randomly divided into two subgroup women with luteal phase support (LPS) and women without. The primary outcome measure was pregnancy rate.Results: The study shows that pregnancy rate was higher with letrozole group using LPS although the difference did not reach statistical significant (p=0.08). After adjustment of possible confounders; patients receiving letrozole with gonadotropin with LPS had significantly higher successful pregnancy rate.Conclusion: Administration of LPS after OI in infertile polycystic ovarian syndrome women may improve pregnancy rate.

scholarly journals Effects of multiple doses of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist on the luteal-phase support in assisted reproductive cycles: A clinical trial study

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Maryam Eftekhar ◽  
Maryam Mirzaei ◽  
Esmat Mangoli ◽  
Yasamin Mehrolhasani
Keyword(s):  
Clinical Trial ◽  
Embryo Transfer ◽  
Gnrh Agonist ◽  
Luteal Phase ◽  
Fertilization Rate ◽  
Gonadotropin Releasing Hormone ◽  
Pregnancy Rates ◽  
Releasing Hormone ◽  
Luteal Phase Support ◽  
Multiple Doses

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.

What is the optimal luteal support in assisted reproductive technology?

2021 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nathalie F. Wang ◽  
Leif Bungum ◽  
Sven O. Skouby
Keyword(s):  
Embryo Transfer ◽  
Luteal Phase ◽  
Live Birth Rate ◽  
Oocyte Retrieval ◽  
Frozen Embryo Transfer ◽  
Treatment Modalities ◽  
Comprehensive Overview ◽  
Luteal Support ◽  
Luteal Phase Support ◽  
Large Effort

Abstract The need for luteal phase support in IVF/ICSI is well established. A large effort has been made in the attempt to identify the optimal type, start, route, dosage and duration of luteal phase support for IVF/ICSI and frozen embryo transfer. These questions are further complicated by the different types of stimulation protocols and ovulation triggers used in ART. The aim of this review is to supply a comprehensive overview of the available types of luteal phase support, and the indications for their use. A review of the literature was carried out in the effort to find the optimal luteal phase support regimen with regards to pregnancy related outcomes and short and long term safety. The results demonstrate that vaginal, intramuscular, subcutaneous and rectal progesterone are equally effective as luteal phase support in IVF/ICSI. GnRH agonists and oral dydrogesterone are new and promising treatment modalities but more research is needed. hCG and estradiol are not recommended for luteal phase support. More research is needed to establish the most optimal luteal phase support in frozen embryo transfer cycles, but progesterone has been shown to improve live birth rate in some studies. Luteal phase support should be commenced between the evening of the day of oocyte retrieval, and day three after oocyte retrieval and it should be continued at least until the day of positive pregnancy test. So, in conclusion still more large and well-designed RCT’s are needed to establish the most optimal luteal phase support in each stimulation protocol, and especially in frozen embryo transfer.

scholarly journals Luteal Support with very Low Daily Dose of Human Chorionic Gonadotropin after Fresh Embryo Transfer as an Alternative to Cycle Segmentation for High Responders Patients Undergoing Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Agonist-Triggered IVF

2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (3) ◽  
pp. 228
Author(s):  
Andrea Roberto Carosso ◽  
Stefano Canosa ◽  
Gianluca Gennarelli ◽  
Marta Sestero ◽  
Bernadette Evangelisti ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Embryo Transfer ◽  
Chorionic Gonadotropin ◽  
Gnrh Agonist ◽  
Human Chorionic Gonadotropin ◽  
Luteal Phase ◽  
Real Life ◽  
Luteal Support ◽  
Gnrh Agonist Trigger ◽  
High Responders ◽  
Agonist Trigger

The segmentation of the in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycle, consisting of the freezing of all embryos and the postponement of embryo transfer (ET), has become popular in recent years, with the main purpose of preventing ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) in patients with high response to controlled ovarian stimulation (COS). Indeed cycle segmentation (CS), especially when coupled to a GnRH-agonist trigger, was shown to reduce the incidence of OHSS in high-risk patients. However, CS increases the economic costs and the work amount for IVF laboratories. An alternative strategy is to perform a fresh ET in association with intensive luteal phase pharmacological support, able to overcome the negative effects of the GnRH-agonist trigger on the luteal phase and on endometrial receptivity. In order to compare these two strategies, we performed a retrospective, real-life cohort study including 240 non-polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCO) women with expected high responsiveness to COS (AMH >2.5 ng/mL), who received either fresh ET plus 100 IU daily human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) as luteal support (FRESH group, n = 133), or cycle segmentation with freezing of all embryos and postponed ET (CS group, n = 107). The primary outcomes were: implantation rate (IR), live birth rate (LBR) after the first ET, and incidence of OHSS. Overall, significantly higher IR and LBR were observed in the CS group than in the FRESH group (42.9% vs. 27.8%, p < 0.05 and 32.7% vs. 19.5%, p < 0.05, respectively); the superiority of CS strategy was particularly evident when 16–19 oocytes were retrieved (LBR 42.2% vs. 9.5%, p = 0.01). Mild OHSS appeared with the same incidence in the two groups, whereas moderate and severe OHSS forms were observed only in the FRESH group (1.5% and 0.8%, respectively). In conclusion, in non-PCO women, high responders submitted to COS with the GnRH-antagonist protocol and GnRH-agonist trigger, CS strategy was associated with higher IR and LBR than the strategy including fresh ET followed by luteal phase support with a low daily hCG dose. CS appears to be advisable, especially when >15 oocytes are retrieved.

The influence of clinical and laboratory factors on the formation of monopronucleated zygotes after intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI)

Zygote ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 27 (02) ◽  
pp. 64-68 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gemma Fabozzi ◽  
Emilia Rega ◽  
Maria Flavia Starita ◽  
Maria Giulia Amendola ◽  
Antonio Colicchia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Study Group ◽  
Stimulation Protocol ◽  
Female Age ◽  
Duration Of Therapy ◽  
Polar Bodies ◽  
Group A ◽  
Laboratory Variables ◽  
Male Patients ◽  
Group B ◽  
Estradiol Levels

SummaryThe aim of the present study was to determine whether clinical or laboratory factors can influence the development of single pronucleated zygotes (1PN) and two polar bodies (PB) after ICSI. In total, 341 ICSI cycles performed at FertiClinic-Villa Margherita from January 2012 to December 2014 were enrolled in the study. Group A included 240 cycles with no 1PN−2PB while group B included 101 cycles with one or more 1PN−2PB. Age, stimulation protocol, infertility factor, amount of gonadotropin administered, duration of therapy, peak estradiol levels, number of follicles at maturation triggering, oocytes retrieved and mature oocytes, time between retrieval and injection and sperm characteristics were compared between groups. In opposition to previous results showing no relationship between 1PN occurrence and clinical or laboratory variables, we observed that 1PN−2PB zygote formation seems to be associated with a lower female age, higher level of E2 and higher number of follicles on day of oocyte maturation triggering, higher number of astenozoospermic male patients, more oocytes retrieved at pick-up, more mature oocytes (MII) and longer time to injection.

scholarly journals Efficacy of Bloodletting Therapy in Patients with Chronic Idiopathic Urticaria: A Randomized Control Trial

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-11
Author(s):  
Biru Ma ◽  
Xiuhua Chen ◽  
Yudan Liang ◽  
Weiquan Ouyang ◽  
Boyan Tang ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Treatment Phase ◽  
Placebo Treatment ◽  
Effective Rate ◽  
Chronic Idiopathic Urticaria ◽  
Intention To Treat ◽  
Parallel Group ◽  
Bloodletting Therapy ◽  
Group A ◽  
Randomized Control ◽  
Group B

Objective. To assess the efficacy of bloodletting therapy (acupoint pricking and cupping) in patients with chronic idiopathic urticaria (CIU) in a randomized, control, parallel-group trial. Methods. A total of 174 patients with CIU enrolled from March 2018 to October 2019 were randomized into three groups: group A treated with bloodletting therapy and ebastine, group B treated with placebo treatment (acupoint pseudopricking and cupping) and ebastine, and group C treated with ebastine only. The intention-to-treat analysis was conducted, and the primary outcome was the effective rate of UAS7 score being reduced to 7 or below after treatment phase. Results. The effective rates at the end of treatment phase were different among the three groups ( P < 0.05 ), which were 73.7% in group A, 45.6% in group B, and 42.9% in group C. Multiple analysis indicated differences between groups A and B ( P < 0.0125 ) and groups A and C ( P < 0.0125 ) and no difference between groups B and C ( P > 0.0125 ). No severe bloodletting therapy-related adverse events were observed. Conclusions. In this study on patients with CIU, one month of bloodletting therapy combined with ebastine is clinically beneficial compared with placebo treatment combined with ebastine and treatment with ebastine only. Thus, bloodletting therapy can be an effective complementary treatment in CIU. This trial is registered with ChiCTR1800015294.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document