Adjuvant sildenafil therapy in poor responders undergoing in vitro fertilization: A prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

Vasodilators for women undergoing fertility treatment

BACKGROUND

The rate of successful pregnancies brought to term has barely increased since the first assisted reproductive technology (ART) technique became available. Research suggests that vasodilators may increase endometrial receptivity, thicken the endometrium, and favour uterine relaxation, all of which could improve the chances of successful assisted pregnancy.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of vasodilators in women undergoing fertility treatment.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register of controlled trials, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases, and two clinical trial registries in April 2024, with no language or date restrictions. We also searched grey literature sources and checked the reference lists of relevant articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing vasodilators (alone or combined with other treatments) versus placebo or no treatment or versus other agents in women undergoing fertility treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently selected studies, assessed risk of bias, extracted data, and calculated risk ratios (RRs). We combined study data using a fixed-effect model and assessed evidence certainty using the GRADE approach. Our primary outcomes were live birth or ongoing pregnancy and vasodilator side effects. Our secondary outcomes were clinical pregnancy, endometrial thickness, multiple gestation, miscarriage, and ectopic pregnancy.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 45 studies with a total of 4404 women. The included studies compared a vasodilator versus a placebo or no treatment (40 RCTs), vasodilators plus another agent versus placebo or no treatment (3 RCTs) or versus oestrogens (3 RCTs). The mean length of follow-up was 15.45 weeks. Overall, the certainty of evidence was very low to moderate. The main limitations were imprecision (low number of events and participants) and risk of bias (lack of blinding in studies that reported subjective outcomes). Vasodilators versus placebo or no treatment Vasodilators may result in little to no difference in rates of live birth or ongoing pregnancy compared with placebo or no treatment (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.58; I² = 0%; 6 RCTs, 740 women; low-certainty evidence), but probably increase overall rates of side effects (RR 2.14, 95% CI 1.55 to 2.98; I² = 0%; 7 RCTs, 668 women; moderate-certainty evidence). The evidence suggests that 246 per 1000 women achieve live birth or ongoing pregnancy with a placebo or no treatment, and 229 to 389 per 1000 will do so using vasodilators. Vasodilators compared with placebo or no treatment likely increase rates of clinical pregnancy (RR 1.45, 95% CI 1.28 to 1.64; I² = 22%; 25 RCTs, 2506 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Vasodilators compared with placebo or no treatment probably have little or no effect on rates of multiple gestation or birth (RR 1.37, 95% CI 0.73 to 2.55; I² = 0%; 7 RCTs, 763 women; moderate-certainty evidence), miscarriage (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.74; I² = 0%; 8 RCTs; 829 women; moderate-certainty evidence), and ectopic pregnancy (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.34 to 4.59; I² = 0%; 4 RCTs, 543 women; moderate-certainty evidence). Most studies found a beneficial effect of vasodilators for endometrial thickness, but the reported effect estimates varied (I² = 93%), from a mean difference of 0.47 mm higher (95% CI 0.90 mm lower to 1. 84 mm higher) to 1.94 mm higher (95% CI 1.37 higher to 2.51 mm higher), and the evidence was very uncertain. Hence, we are unsure how to interpret these results. Vasodilators versus oestrogens Vasodilators compared with oestrogens may have little or no effect on rates of live birth or ongoing pregnancy (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.33; 1 RCT, 44 women, low-certainty evidence). The evidence is very uncertain regarding the effect of sildenafil compared with oestrogens on clinical pregnancy rates (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.38; I² = 59%; 3 RCTs, 262 women; very low-certainty evidence), endometrial thickness (RR 1.90, 95 CI 1.15 to 3.13; 1 RCT, 120 women; very low-certainty evidence) and miscarriage rates (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.12; 1 RCT, 44 women; very low-certainty evidence) AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Among women undergoing fertility treatment, there may be little or no difference in the rate of live birth or ongoing pregnancy in those who receive vasodilators compared with those who receive a placebo or no treatment, and compared with those who receive oestrogens. Compared with placebo or no treatment, vasodilators likely increase rates of clinical pregnancy, but probably also increase overall rates of side effects. The evidence on clinical pregnancy with vasodilators versus oestrogens is very uncertain, and we found no evidence on overall side effects for the comparison of vasodilators versus oestrogens. We are unsure about the effect of vasodilators versus placebo or no treatment and versus oestrogens on endometrial thickness. Vasodilators versus placebo or no treatment probably have little or no effect on multiple gestation or birth, miscarriage, and ectopic pregnancy. Future studies should be adequately randomised and powered to ensure a more accurate evaluation of each treatment, with live births as a primary outcome.

Comparison of two ovarian stimulation protocols among women with poor response: A randomized clinical trial

This is a randomized controlled trial conducted in a tertiary referral fertility department. Participants were women with previous poor ovarian response undergoing in vitro fertilization. (IVF). One hundred and ninety-two women were randomized to the short GnRH agonist and antagonist regimens. The primary outcome was the number of oocytes retrieved. Secondary outcome measures were the number of embryos transferred, chemical and clinical pregnancy rate and live birth. The number of oocytes retrieved was higher with the gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist regimen compared to the short agonist regimen (3.10 2.70 vs. 2.992.60), but there was no significant difference. The duration of stimulation and total gonadotropin dose were higher with short agonist regimens compared to antagonist regimens, with the latter being statistically significant (p < 0.001). The chemical pregnancy rate was 8.33 percent with the short agonist regimen and 7.29 percent with the antagonist regimen, with no statistically significant difference (p = 0.79). In terms of lower cycles cancelation and higher chemical pregnancy, short GnRH agonist regim is appropriate choice for poor responders.

Effect of vaginal/oral tadalafil on endometrial thickness in IVF patients: a double-blind, placebo controlled RCT: a pilot study

Objective: To investigate the effect of tadalafil (a long working phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitor) on the endometrial thickness, biochemical pregnancy rates and clinical pregnancy rates in women in an in vitro fertilization treatment. This study investigates the use of vaginal and oral administration of tadalafil. Study design: This is a prospective double-blind placebo-controlled randomized controlled trial with 58 patients in an in vitro fertilization treatment with a short antagonist stimulation protocol. The study population is divided into three equal groups comparing oral and vaginal administration of tadalafil to a control group. Results: No significant difference in endometrial thickness and number of biochemical and clinical pregnancies was found between the three groups. Conclusion: This study could not show a significant benefit of administration of tadalafil. However, a trend towards more pregnancies in the group treated with oral tadalafil is seen, more research in specific subgroups is needed.

Effectiveness of phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors on the treatment of thin endometrium and pregnancy outcomes: An systematic review

Phosphodiesterase type 5 (PDE5) inhibitors are thought to play a role in increasing endometrial thickness and increasing the success rate of pregnancy outcomes. This study was done to investigate the effects of PDE5 inhibitors on infertile women with thin endometrium and pregnancy outcomes. In this systematic review, all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies were retrieved from databases including Institute for Scientific Information (ISI), PubMed, and Scopus by interesting keywords. A checklist was designed to collect necessary data and pregnancy outcomes, and the required items were recorded. PDE5 inhibitors through various mechanisms such as induction of vasodilatory effect through the effect on NO/cGMP signaling on vascular smooth muscle, through regulating cells proliferation and induction angiogenesis by increasing the expression of tumor suppressor factor (p53), and vascular endothelial growth factor A (VEGF-A) and downregulating inflammation by downregulating proinflammatory cytokines, affect endometrial thickness that eventually increases and pregnancy outcomes. Although PDE5s inhibitors increase endometrial thickness by different mechanisms, especially in women with thin endometrial, this does not necessarily mean that they induce a positive effect in all situations. However, their positive effects on pregnancy outcome may be affected by the time of administration, type of infertility treatment, underlying diseases such as pelvic disorders and inflammation. So in this regard, there are still ambiguous aspects that required further RCTs study in this area.

Sildenafil Supplementation for Women Undergoing Infertility Treatments: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to summarize data on the effectiveness of Sildenafil supplementation for women undergoing assisted reproduction techniques. This meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluates the effects of Sildenafil administration during infertility treatments compared with a control group in infertile women. Outcomes evaluated were endometrial thickness (ETh) and the clinical pregnancy rate (CPR). The chemical pregnancy rate (ChPR) was also evaluated. Pooled results were expressed as the risk ratio (RR) or mean differences (MD) with a 95% confidence interval (95% CI). Women undergoing ovulation induction who received Sildenafil showed higher ETh and a higher CPR in comparison to controls. In this group, both the ETh and ChPR resulted in significantly higher values only with delayed start administration. Women undergoing fresh or frozen embryo transfer who received Sildenafil showed no significant advantages regarding ETh and CPR in comparison to controls. In this group, we found a significantly higher ChPR in women receiving Sildenafil. A subgroup analysis revealed significant advantages regarding ETh with oral administration for women undergoing fresh or frozen embryo transfer. Sildenafil therapy appears to improve endometrial thickness and pregnancy rate in women undergoing timed intercourses but it resulted not effective in IUI and IVF treatments. Further RCTs with rigorous methodology are still mandatory.

Meta-analysis of GnRH-antagonists versus GnRH-agonists in poor responder protocols

PURPOSE

Considering the insufficient evidence supporting an ideal protocol for poor responder management in IVF/ICSI cycles, the aim of the current meta-analysis was to compare GnRH-antagonist versus GnRH-agonist protocols in poor responders, evaluating effectiveness and safety.

METHODS

Meta-analysis was conducted using Medcalc 16.8 version software. Standardized mean differences (SMD), odds ratios (OR), and the respective 95% confidence intervals (CI) were determined appropriately. The Cochran Q statistic and the I² test were used to assess studies' heterogeneity.

RESULTS

GnRH-agonists were shown to correlate with fewer cancelled IVF/ICSI cycles (p = 0.044, OR = 1.268 > 1, 95% CI 1.007, 1.598), a larger number of embryos transferred (p = 0.008, SMD = - 0.230, 95% CI - 0.400, - 0.0599), and more clinical pregnancies (p = 0.018, OR = 0.748 < 1, 95% CI 0.588, 0.952). However, GnRH-antagonists resulted in a significantly shorter duration of ovarian stimulation (p = 0.007, SMD = - 0.426. 95% CI - 0.736, - 0.115). The number of oocytes and mature oocytes retrieved in both protocols did not differ statistically (p = 0.216, SMD = - 0.130, 95% CI - 0.337, 0.0763 and p = 0.807, SMD = - 0.0203, 95% CI - 0.183, 0.142, respectively). Moreover, a high heterogeneity among studies was observed regarding duration of ovarian stimulation (I² = 90.6%), number of oocytes (I² = 82.83%)/mature oocytes retrieved (I² = 70.39%), and embryos transferred (I² = 72.83%).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the present meta-analysis, agonist protocols could be suggested as a first choice approach, in terms of effectiveness. Due to the high studies' heterogeneity, results should be considered with caution. Accordingly, larger cohort studies and meta-analyses like the present one will enhance the robustness of the emerging results to identify the ideal protocol for poor responders.

The ESHRE Guideline Group on Ovarian Stimulation, Bosch E, Broer S, Griesinger G, Grynberg M, Humaidan P, Kolibianakis E, Kunicki M, La Marca A, Lainas G, Le Clef N, Massin N, Mastenbroek S, Polyzos N, Sunkara SK, Timeva T, Töyli M, Urbancsek J, Vermeulen N, Broekmans F. ESHRE guideline: ovarian stimulation for IVF/ICSI†

STUDY QUESTION

What is the recommended management of ovarian stimulation, based on the best available evidence in the literature?

SUMMARY ANSWER

The guideline development group formulated 84 recommendations answering 18 key questions on ovarian stimulation.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Ovarian stimulation for IVF/ICSI has been discussed briefly in the National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guideline on fertility problems, and the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologist has published a statement on ovarian stimulation in assisted reproduction. There are, to our knowledge, no evidence-based guidelines dedicated to the process of ovarian stimulation.

STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION

The guideline was developed according to the structured methodology for development of ESHRE guidelines. After formulation of key questions by a group of experts, literature searches and assessments were performed. Papers published up to 8 November 2018 and written in English were included. The critical outcomes for this guideline were efficacy in terms of cumulative live birth rate per started cycle or live birth rate per started cycle, as well as safety in terms of the rate of occurrence of moderate and/or severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS).

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING METHODS

Based on the collected evidence, recommendations were formulated and discussed until consensus was reached within the guideline group. A stakeholder review was organized after finalization of the draft. The final version was approved by the guideline group and the ESHRE Executive Committee.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The guideline provides 84 recommendations: 7 recommendations on pre-stimulation management, 40 recommendations on LH suppression and gonadotrophin stimulation, 11 recommendations on monitoring during ovarian stimulation, 18 recommendations on triggering of final oocyte maturation and luteal support and 8 recommendations on the prevention of OHSS. These include 61 evidence-based recommendations-of which only 21 were formulated as strong recommendations-and 19 good practice points and 4 research-only recommendations. The guideline includes a strong recommendation for the use of either antral follicle count or anti-Müllerian hormone (instead of other ovarian reserve tests) to predict high and poor response to ovarian stimulation. The guideline also includes a strong recommendation for the use of the GnRH antagonist protocol over the GnRH agonist protocols in the general IVF/ICSI population, based on the comparable efficacy and higher safety. For predicted poor responders, GnRH antagonists and GnRH agonists are equally recommended. With regards to hormone pre-treatment and other adjuvant treatments (metformin, growth hormone (GH), testosterone, dehydroepiandrosterone, aspirin and sildenafil), the guideline group concluded that none are recommended for increasing efficacy or safety.

LIMITATIONS REASON FOR CAUTION

Several newer interventions are not well studied yet. For most of these interventions, a recommendation against the intervention or a research-only recommendation was formulated based on insufficient evidence. Future studies may require these recommendations to be revised.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

The guideline provides clinicians with clear advice on best practice in ovarian stimulation, based on the best evidence available. In addition, a list of research recommendations is provided to promote further studies in ovarian stimulation.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS

The guideline was developed and funded by ESHRE, covering expenses associated with the guideline meetings, with the literature searches and with the dissemination of the guideline. The guideline group members did not receive payment. F.B. reports research grant from Ferring and consulting fees from Merck, Ferring, Gedeon Richter and speaker's fees from Merck. N.P. reports research grants from Ferring, MSD, Roche Diagnositics, Theramex and Besins Healthcare; consulting fees from MSD, Ferring and IBSA; and speaker's fees from Ferring, MSD, Merck Serono, IBSA, Theramex, Besins Healthcare, Gedeon Richter and Roche Diagnostics. A.L.M reports research grants from Ferring, MSD, IBSA, Merck Serono, Gedeon Richter and TEVA and consulting fees from Roche, Beckman-Coulter. G.G. reports consulting fees from MSD, Ferring, Merck Serono, IBSA, Finox, Theramex, Gedeon-Richter, Glycotope, Abbott, Vitrolife, Biosilu, ReprodWissen, Obseva and PregLem and speaker's fees from MSD, Ferring, Merck Serono, IBSA, Finox, TEVA, Gedeon Richter, Glycotope, Abbott, Vitrolife and Biosilu. E.B. reports research grants from Gedeon Richter; consulting and speaker's fees from MSD, Ferring, Abbot, Gedeon Richter, Merck Serono, Roche Diagnostics and IBSA; and ownership interest from IVI-RMS Valencia. P.H. reports research grants from Gedeon Richter, Merck, IBSA and Ferring and speaker's fees from MSD, IBSA, Merck and Gedeon Richter. J.U. reports speaker's fees from IBSA and Ferring. N.M. reports research grants from MSD, Merck and IBSA; consulting fees from MSD, Merck, IBSA and Ferring and speaker's fees from MSD, Merck, IBSA, Gedeon Richter and Theramex. M.G. reports speaker's fees from Merck Serono, Ferring, Gedeon Richter and MSD. S.K.S. reports speaker's fees from Merck, MSD, Ferring and Pharmasure. E.K. reports speaker's fees from Merck Serono, Angellini Pharma and MSD. M.K. reports speaker's fees from Ferring. T.T. reports speaker's fees from Merck, MSD and MLD. The other authors report no conflicts of interest.

DISCLAIMER

This guideline represents the views of ESHRE, which were achieved after careful consideration of the scientific evidence available at the time of preparation. In the absence of scientific evidence on certain aspects, a consensus between the relevant ESHRE stakeholders has been obtained. Adherence to these clinical practice guidelines does not guarantee a successful or specific outcome, nor does it establish a standard of care. Clinical practice guidelines do not replace the need for application of clinical judgment to each individual presentation, nor variations based on locality and facility type. ESHRE makes no warranty, express or implied, regarding the clinical practice guidelines and specifically excludes any warranties of merchantability and fitness for a particular use or purpose. (Full disclaimer available at www.eshre.eu/guidelines.) †ESHRE Pages content is not externally peer reviewed. The manuscript has been approved by the Executive Committee of ESHRE.

Vasodilators for women undergoing fertility treatment

BACKGROUND

The rate of successful pregnancies brought to term has barely increased since the first assisted reproductive technology (ART) technique became available. Vasodilators have been proposed to increase endometrial receptivity, thicken the endometrium, and favour uterine relaxation, all of which could improve uterine receptivity and enhance the chances for successful assisted pregnancy.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of vasodilators in women undergoing fertility treatment.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following electronic databases, trial registers, and websites: the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group (CGF) Specialised Register of controlled trials, the Cochrane Central Register of of Controlled Trials, via the Cochrane Register of Studies Online (CRSO), MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Web of Knowledge, the Open System for Information on Grey Literature in Europe (OpenSIGLE), the Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information Database (LILACS), clinical trial registries, and the reference lists of relevant articles. We conducted the search in October 2017 and applied no language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing vasodilators alone or in combination with other treatments versus placebo or no treatment or versus other agents in women undergoing fertility treatment.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Four review authors independently selected studies, assessed risk of bias, extracted data, and calculated risk ratios (RRs). We combined study data using a fixed-effect model and assessed evidence quality using Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation Working Group (GRADE) methods. Our primary outcomes were live birth or ongoing pregnancy and vasodilator side effects. Secondary outcomes included clinical pregnancy, endometrial thickness, multiple pregnancy, miscarriage, and ectopic pregnancy.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 15 studies with a total of 1326 women. All included studies compared a vasodilator versus placebo or no treatment. We judged most of these studies as having unclear risk of bias. Overall, the quality of evidence was low to moderate for most outcomes. The main limitations were imprecision due to low numbers of events and participants and risk of bias due to unclear methods of randomisation.Vasodilators probably make little or no difference in rates of live birth compared with placebo or no treatment (RR 1.18, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.83 to 1.69; three RCTs; N = 350; I² = 0%; moderate-quality evidence) but probably increase overall rates of side effects including headache and tachycardia (RR 2.35, 95% CI 1.51 to 3.66; four RCTs; N = 418; I² = 0%; moderate-quality evidence). Evidence suggests that if 236 per 1000 women achieve live birth with placebo or no treatment, then between 196 and 398 per 1000 will do so with the use of vasodilators.Compared with placebo or no treatment, vasodilators may slightly improve clinical pregnancy rates (RR 1.45, 95% CI 1.19 to 1.77; 11 RCTs; N = 1054; I² = 6%; low-quality evidence). Vasodilators probably make little or no difference in rates of multiple gestation (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.55 to 2.42; three RCTs; N = 370; I² = 0%; low-quality evidence), miscarriage (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.86; three RCTs; N = 350; I² = 0%; low-quality evidence), or ectopic pregnancy (RR 1.48, 95% CI 0.25 to 8.69; two RCTs; N = 250; I² = 5%; low-quality evidence). All studies found benefit for endometrial thickening, but reported effects varied (I² = 92%) and ranged from a mean difference of 0.80 higher (95% CI 0.18 to 1.42) to 3.57 higher (95% CI 3.01 to 4.13) with very low-quality evidence, so we are uncertain how to interpret these results.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Evidence was insufficient to show whether vasodilators increase the live birth rate in women undergoing fertility treatment. However, low-quality evidence suggests that vasodilators may slightly increase clinical pregnancy rates. Moderate-quality evidence shows that vasodilators increase overall side effects in comparison with placebo or no treatment. Adequately powered studies are needed so that each treatment can be evaluated more accurately.