The gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol has emerged as an efficacious alternative to the GnRH agonist protocol for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) during in vitro fertilization (IVF) cy...The gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol has emerged as an efficacious alternative to the GnRH agonist protocol for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) during in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles, and has been demonstrated applicability in infertile female patients with diverse ovarian responses. While the clinical implementation of the antagonist COH protocol has achieved widespread consensus, opportunities for refinement persist. Therefore, this review article focuses on the advantages and disadvantages of GnRH antagonist protocol, the selection of optimal standard doses, and the strategies for adjusting antagonist doses after the premature luteinizing hormone (LH) surge, aiming to provide more reasonable and scientific recommendations for the application of this scheme.展开更多
Objective: To evaluate the effects of recombinant LH (rLH) supplementation on embryo quality in IVF/ICSI cycles with GnRH antagonist. Study design: Prospective, randomized controlled study. Thirty women were enrolled,...Objective: To evaluate the effects of recombinant LH (rLH) supplementation on embryo quality in IVF/ICSI cycles with GnRH antagonist. Study design: Prospective, randomized controlled study. Thirty women were enrolled, 15 in the study (FSH + rLH) group and 15 in the control (rFSH only) group. On the day GnRH antagonist was started, the study group patients received 75 IU of rLH in addition to rFSH. The main outcome measures were embryo quality, number of oocytes retrieved, and fertilization rate. Results: The rLH group had significantly more top-quality embryos (36/43, 84%) compared to the control group (40/68, 59%;p = 0.006). Fertilization rates and number of oocytes retrieved were similar between groups. Progesterone and estradiol (E2) concentrations in follicular fluid were higher in the study group compared to controls (16.5 ± 2.5 μg/ml vs. 11.4 ± 3.6 μg/ml progesterone, P = 0.07;and 687 ± 112 pg/ml vs. 471 ± 65 pg/ml E2, p = 0.08). Conclusion: Adding rLH to ovarian stimulation with GnRH antagonist can yield higher quality embryos.展开更多
Background: This study aimed to determine if the gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol is optimal for expected poor ovarian responders with tubal factor undergoing in vitro fertilization-embryo tra...Background: This study aimed to determine if the gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol is optimal for expected poor ovarian responders with tubal factor undergoing in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer (IVF-ET). Methods: A total of 341 IVF-ET cycles were retrospectively identified. The following inclusion criteria were applied: age ≥ 40 years and patients with tubal factors. The cycles were divided into two groups: a GnRH antagonist group (157 cycles) and a GnRH agonist group (184 cycles). Results: The duration of stimulation and the total doses of gonadotropin in the GnRH agonist group were significantly more than those in the GnRH antagonist group (P < 0.05). There were significant differences in LH and P values on the hCG measurement days between the two groups (0.91 ± 1.17 vs. 4.82 ± 4.69 U/L and 0.69 ± 0.42 vs. 1.03 ± 0.50 ng/mL, P < 0.05). The implantation rate of the GnRH antagonist group was 12.24%, which was slightly higher than that of the GnRH agonist group (10.10%, P = 0.437). The clinical pregnancy rate of the two groups showed no statistical differences (23.36% vs. 23.03%, P = 1.000). Conclusion: For expected poor ovarian responders, the GnRH antagonist protocol was, to some extent, superior to the GnRH agonist protocol in terms of the implantation and clinical pregnancy rates.展开更多
Background: Studies have shown a strong correlation between the growth of E2 in serum and estrone-3-glucuronide (E1-3G) in urine during ovarian stimulation. Thus, we developed theoretical models for using urinary E1-3...Background: Studies have shown a strong correlation between the growth of E2 in serum and estrone-3-glucuronide (E1-3G) in urine during ovarian stimulation. Thus, we developed theoretical models for using urinary E1-3G in ovarian stimulation and focused on their experimental verification and analysis. Methods: A prospective, observational pilot study was conducted involving 54 patients who underwent 54 cycles of ovarian stimulation. The goal was to establish the growth rate of urinary E1-3G during the course of stimulation and to determine the daily upper and lower limits of growth rates at which stimulation is appropriate and safe. Controlled ovarian stimulation was performed using two different stimulation protocols—an antagonist protocol in 25 cases and a progestin-primed ovarian stimulation protocol (PPOS) in 29 cases, with fixed doses of gonadotropins. From the second day of stimulation, patients self-measured their daily urine E1-3G levels at home using a portable analyzer. In parallel, a standard ultrasound follow-up protocol accompanied by a determination of E2, LH, and P levels was applied to optimally control stimulation. Results: The average daily growth rates in both groups were about 50%. The daily increase in E1-3G for the antagonist protocol ranged from 14% to 79%, while they were 28% to 79% for the PPOS protocol. Conclusion: This is the first study to analyze the dynamics of E1-3G in two different protocols and to estimate the limits of its increase during the entire course of the stimulation. The results confirm our theoretical model for the viability of using urinary E1-3G for monitoring ovarian stimulation.展开更多
Objective:To determine whether a single dose of gonadotropin-releasing hormone(GnRH)agonist administered subcutaneously in addition to the regular progesterone supplementation could provide a better luteal support in ...Objective:To determine whether a single dose of gonadotropin-releasing hormone(GnRH)agonist administered subcutaneously in addition to the regular progesterone supplementation could provide a better luteal support in antagonist protocol fresh embryo transfer cycles.Methods:This prospective,multicentric,cohort study included total 140 women,70 in each group.Controlled ovarian stimulation was carried out as per fixed GnRH antagonist protocol.The trigger was given with hCG.In vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection(IVF/ICSI)was performed and day-3 embryos were transferred.Patients were divided into groups 1 and 2 based on computer generated randomization sheet.Six days following oocyte retrieval,group 1 received 0.2 mg decapeptyl subcutaneously in addition to regular progesterone support while group 2 received progesterone only.Luteal support was given for 14 days to both groups;if pregnancy was confirmed luteal support was continued till 12 weeks of gestation.The clinical pregnancy rate was the primary outcome.The implantation rate,miscarriage rate,live birth delivery rate,and multiple pregnancy rates were the secondary outcomes.Results:A total of 140 patients were analysed,70 in each group.Clinical pregnancy rates(47.1%vs.35.7%;P=0.17),implantation rates(23.4%vs.18.1%,P=0.24),live birth delivery rates(41.4%vs.27.1%,P=0.08),and multiple pregnancy rates(21.2%vs.16.0%,P=0.74)were higher in group 1 than in group 2.Group 1 had a lower miscarriage rate than group 2(5.7%vs.8.6%;P=0.75).However,these differences were not statistically significant between the two groups.Conclusions:Administration of a single dose of GnRH agonist in addition to regular natural micronized vaginal progesterone as luteal support in GnRH antagonist protocol cycles marginally improves implantation rates,clinical pregnancy rates,and live birth delivery rates.However,more studies with higher sample sizes are needed before any conclusive statements about GnRH agonist as luteal phase support can be made.展开更多
基金Hainan Province Major Science and Technology Plan Projects(No.ZDKJ2021037,ZDKJ2017007)National Natural Science Foundation of China(No.81960283),and Co-funded by the Hainan Provincial Academician Innovation Platform Research Project and the Hainan Provincial Clinical Medicine Center Construction Project。
文摘The gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol has emerged as an efficacious alternative to the GnRH agonist protocol for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) during in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles, and has been demonstrated applicability in infertile female patients with diverse ovarian responses. While the clinical implementation of the antagonist COH protocol has achieved widespread consensus, opportunities for refinement persist. Therefore, this review article focuses on the advantages and disadvantages of GnRH antagonist protocol, the selection of optimal standard doses, and the strategies for adjusting antagonist doses after the premature luteinizing hormone (LH) surge, aiming to provide more reasonable and scientific recommendations for the application of this scheme.
文摘Objective: To evaluate the effects of recombinant LH (rLH) supplementation on embryo quality in IVF/ICSI cycles with GnRH antagonist. Study design: Prospective, randomized controlled study. Thirty women were enrolled, 15 in the study (FSH + rLH) group and 15 in the control (rFSH only) group. On the day GnRH antagonist was started, the study group patients received 75 IU of rLH in addition to rFSH. The main outcome measures were embryo quality, number of oocytes retrieved, and fertilization rate. Results: The rLH group had significantly more top-quality embryos (36/43, 84%) compared to the control group (40/68, 59%;p = 0.006). Fertilization rates and number of oocytes retrieved were similar between groups. Progesterone and estradiol (E2) concentrations in follicular fluid were higher in the study group compared to controls (16.5 ± 2.5 μg/ml vs. 11.4 ± 3.6 μg/ml progesterone, P = 0.07;and 687 ± 112 pg/ml vs. 471 ± 65 pg/ml E2, p = 0.08). Conclusion: Adding rLH to ovarian stimulation with GnRH antagonist can yield higher quality embryos.
文摘Background: This study aimed to determine if the gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol is optimal for expected poor ovarian responders with tubal factor undergoing in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer (IVF-ET). Methods: A total of 341 IVF-ET cycles were retrospectively identified. The following inclusion criteria were applied: age ≥ 40 years and patients with tubal factors. The cycles were divided into two groups: a GnRH antagonist group (157 cycles) and a GnRH agonist group (184 cycles). Results: The duration of stimulation and the total doses of gonadotropin in the GnRH agonist group were significantly more than those in the GnRH antagonist group (P < 0.05). There were significant differences in LH and P values on the hCG measurement days between the two groups (0.91 ± 1.17 vs. 4.82 ± 4.69 U/L and 0.69 ± 0.42 vs. 1.03 ± 0.50 ng/mL, P < 0.05). The implantation rate of the GnRH antagonist group was 12.24%, which was slightly higher than that of the GnRH agonist group (10.10%, P = 0.437). The clinical pregnancy rate of the two groups showed no statistical differences (23.36% vs. 23.03%, P = 1.000). Conclusion: For expected poor ovarian responders, the GnRH antagonist protocol was, to some extent, superior to the GnRH agonist protocol in terms of the implantation and clinical pregnancy rates.
文摘Background: Studies have shown a strong correlation between the growth of E2 in serum and estrone-3-glucuronide (E1-3G) in urine during ovarian stimulation. Thus, we developed theoretical models for using urinary E1-3G in ovarian stimulation and focused on their experimental verification and analysis. Methods: A prospective, observational pilot study was conducted involving 54 patients who underwent 54 cycles of ovarian stimulation. The goal was to establish the growth rate of urinary E1-3G during the course of stimulation and to determine the daily upper and lower limits of growth rates at which stimulation is appropriate and safe. Controlled ovarian stimulation was performed using two different stimulation protocols—an antagonist protocol in 25 cases and a progestin-primed ovarian stimulation protocol (PPOS) in 29 cases, with fixed doses of gonadotropins. From the second day of stimulation, patients self-measured their daily urine E1-3G levels at home using a portable analyzer. In parallel, a standard ultrasound follow-up protocol accompanied by a determination of E2, LH, and P levels was applied to optimally control stimulation. Results: The average daily growth rates in both groups were about 50%. The daily increase in E1-3G for the antagonist protocol ranged from 14% to 79%, while they were 28% to 79% for the PPOS protocol. Conclusion: This is the first study to analyze the dynamics of E1-3G in two different protocols and to estimate the limits of its increase during the entire course of the stimulation. The results confirm our theoretical model for the viability of using urinary E1-3G for monitoring ovarian stimulation.
文摘Objective:To determine whether a single dose of gonadotropin-releasing hormone(GnRH)agonist administered subcutaneously in addition to the regular progesterone supplementation could provide a better luteal support in antagonist protocol fresh embryo transfer cycles.Methods:This prospective,multicentric,cohort study included total 140 women,70 in each group.Controlled ovarian stimulation was carried out as per fixed GnRH antagonist protocol.The trigger was given with hCG.In vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection(IVF/ICSI)was performed and day-3 embryos were transferred.Patients were divided into groups 1 and 2 based on computer generated randomization sheet.Six days following oocyte retrieval,group 1 received 0.2 mg decapeptyl subcutaneously in addition to regular progesterone support while group 2 received progesterone only.Luteal support was given for 14 days to both groups;if pregnancy was confirmed luteal support was continued till 12 weeks of gestation.The clinical pregnancy rate was the primary outcome.The implantation rate,miscarriage rate,live birth delivery rate,and multiple pregnancy rates were the secondary outcomes.Results:A total of 140 patients were analysed,70 in each group.Clinical pregnancy rates(47.1%vs.35.7%;P=0.17),implantation rates(23.4%vs.18.1%,P=0.24),live birth delivery rates(41.4%vs.27.1%,P=0.08),and multiple pregnancy rates(21.2%vs.16.0%,P=0.74)were higher in group 1 than in group 2.Group 1 had a lower miscarriage rate than group 2(5.7%vs.8.6%;P=0.75).However,these differences were not statistically significant between the two groups.Conclusions:Administration of a single dose of GnRH agonist in addition to regular natural micronized vaginal progesterone as luteal support in GnRH antagonist protocol cycles marginally improves implantation rates,clinical pregnancy rates,and live birth delivery rates.However,more studies with higher sample sizes are needed before any conclusive statements about GnRH agonist as luteal phase support can be made.
