Gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol: a novel method of ovarian stimulation in poor responders

Effect of acupuncture on women with poor ovarian response: a study protocol for a multicenter randomized controlled trial

Background

Poor ovarian response (POR), a manifestation of low ovarian reserve and ovarian aging, leads to a significant reduction in the pregnancy rate after in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer. Acupuncture has increasingly been used to improve the ovarian reserve. The purpose of this study will be to evaluate the effect of acupuncture on increasing the number of retrieved oocytes after controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in women with POR.

Methods

This will be a multicenter randomized controlled trial. A total of 140 women with POR will be randomly assigned to receive acupuncture or nontreatment for 12 weeks before controlled ovarian hyperstimulation. The primary outcome will be the number of retrieved oocytes. The secondary outcomes will be antral follicle counts, serum levels of anti-Müllerian hormone, basal serum levels of follicle stimulating hormone, luteinizing hormone and estradiol levels, scores from the self-rating anxiety scale, fertilization rates, cleavage rates, available embryo rates, and high-quality embryo rates. The safety of acupuncture will also be assessed.

Discussion

The results of this trial will help to determine the effectiveness of acupuncture in the treatment of POR. This may provide a new treatment option for patients with POR and their physicians.

Trial registration

AMCTR-IPR-18000198. Registered on 10 August 2018.

A randomized, single-blind, prospective trial comparing three different gonadotropin doses with or without addition of letrozole during ovulation stimulation in patients with poor ovarian response

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this randomized controlled trial (RCT) was to investigate whether IVF outcomes would differ between patients with POR who received three different gonadotropin doses with or without the addition of letrozole during ovulation stimulation.

STUDY DESIGN

Only those who fulfilled two of the three Bologna criteria were included to the study. 95 patients met the inclusion criteria and agreed to participate in the study. In the first group, 31 patients were treated with 450IU gonadotropins. In the second group, 31 patients were treated with 300IU gonadotropins. The third group comprised 33 patients and was treated with 150IU gonadotropins in combination with letrozole.

RESULTS

The results indicate that differences in doses of hMG and rFSH in patients with POR result in a similar number of retrieved MII and fertilized oocytes, similar fertilization rates, number of transferred embryos, implantation, cancelation, chemical, clinical, and ongoing pregnancy rates.

CONCLUSIONS

Increasing the dose of gonadotropins during ovulation stimulation is an intuitively appealing approach when the patient is a poor responder. However, increasing the dose does not necessarily improve the reproductive outcome. Using a mild stimulation with addition of letrozole was as effective as stimulation with higher doses of gonadotropins alone in this patient population.

Precycle Estradiol in Synchronization and Scheduling of Antagonist Cycles

Antagonist cycles have an inherent issue of lack of flexibility. As a result where batching of cycles is desired, it is not the preferred protocol in ART cycles. There is also the limitation of ovarian response in antagonist cycle due to the size heterogenesities of antral follicles at the start of stimulation. Among the different options available, use of estrogen in the luteal phase of the preceding cycle has definitely shown benefits with regard to better control of cycle as well as synchronization of follicles available for stimulation. The article gives a detailed analysis of the different options available for timing the egg collection in antagonist cycles, the advantages and drawbacks, and the method of use of estrogen. Whereas in the majority of the trials where estrogen pretreatment was used, the goal of scheduling of egg collection was definitely achieved, increased duration and dose of gonadotropin stimulation were required. There was definite advantage of higher oocyte yield in these cycles. The possibility of premature LH rise later during stimulation and subsequent poor implantation in these cycles has to be further evaluated. Nevertheless, batching of patient friendly antagonist cycles can be effectively possible by use of precycle estrogen treatment.

Which is the best IVF/ICSI protocol to be used in poor responders receiving growth hormone as an adjuvant treatment? A prospective randomized trial

This open label randomized study aims to define the best protocol to be used with growth hormone in poor responders, with comparison performed to delineate which protocol offers the best cycle outcomes. Two-hundred eighty-seven poor responders were included. The patients were randomly allocated into four groups receiving growth hormone (GH) as an adjuvant therapy added to either long or short agonist protocol, miniflare or antagonist protocols. The short/GH gave significantly lower mean number of oocytes when compared with the long/GH, antagonist/GH and miniflare/GH (4 ± 1.69 versus 5.06 ± 1.83, 4.95 + / = 1.90 and4.98 ± 2.51, respectively p = 0.005). Considering the number of fertilized oocytes, the long/GH showed significantly higher levels than short/GH and antagonist/GH (3.73 ± 1.47 versus 3.02 ± 1.52 and 2.89 ± 1.14, respectively). The main drawback is that it required significantly higher HMG dose and longer duration of stimulation. The long/GH was superior when compared with the three protocols regarding the number of oocytes retrieved and fertilized. But, when considering the clinical pregnancy rates, there was a difference in favor of the long/GH but not reaching a statistically significant value (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01897324).

Comparison of long GnRH agonist versus GnRH antagonist protocol in poor responders

Objective:

To compare long GnRH agonist with GnRH antagonist protocol in poor responders.

Materials and Methods:

Medical charts of 531 poor responder women undergoing in-vitro fertilization (IVF) cycle at Zeynep Kamil Maternity and Children’s Hospital, IVF Center were retrospectively analysed. Those who received at least 300 IU/daily gonadotropin and had ≤3 oocytes retrieved were enrolled in the study. Poor responders were categorized into two groups as those who received long GnRH agonist or GnRH antagonist regimen.

Results:

Treatment duration and total gonadotropin dosage were significantly higher in women undergoing the long GnRH agonist regimen compared with the GnRH antagonist regimen (p<0.001 for both). Although the number of total and mature oocytes retrieved was similar between the groups, good quality embryos were found to be higher in the GnRH antagonist regimen. The day of embryo transfer and number of transferred embryos were similar in the groups. No statistically significant differences were detected in pregnancy (10.5% vs 14.1%), clinical pregnancy (7.7% vs 10.6%) and early pregnancy loss rates (27.2% vs 35%) between the groups.

Conclusion:

GnRH antagonist regimen may be preferable to long GnRH regimen as it could decrease the cost and treatment duration in poor responders.

Outcome of cryopreserved pronuclear oocytes obtained after ovarian stimulation with either HMG or recFSH and the GnRH-antagonist cetrorelix

The present retrospective study evaluated the outcome of frozen-thaw cycles with oocytes obtained either during a multiple dose protocol of cetrorelix, or after the use of a gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist. A total of 101 subfertile couples were included. These couples had a total of 222 transfers of frozen-thawed pronuclear oocytes after IVF/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) treatment. According to the stimulation protocol during various cycles, four groups were established: cetrorelix/recombinant FSH (recFSH) (69 cycles), cetrorelix/human menopausal gonadotrophin (HMG) (10 cycles), GnRH-agonist/recFSH (71 cycles) and GnRH-agonist/HMG (72 cycles). The transfer cycles were mildly stimulated with transdermal oestradiol. No statistically significant difference was seen among the four groups regarding post-thaw survival rate, cumulative embryo score, implantation rate and pregnancies. Frozen-thawed pronuclear oocytes obtained with the use of cetrorelix give satisfactory implantation and pregnancy rates, similar to those obtained with a GnRH-agonist. These results do not depend on the gonadotrophins (HMG or recFSH) used in the collecting cycle.

Comparison of GnRH agonist and antagonist protocols in normoresponder patients who had IVF-ICSI

PURPOSE

To measure the estradiol (E2) and progesterone levels on day of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) and to assess follicular development, pregnancy rates and IVF-ICSI outcomes comparing gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist and antagonist protocols.

METHODS

A total 195 women were included in the study. The patients were treated with agonist or antagonist protocol according to the clinician's and patient's preference. GnRH agonist and antagonists were administered to 77 and 118 patients, respectively.

RESULTS

Retrieved oocyte number (RON), metaphase two oocyte number (MON), E2 and progesteron levels on day of hCG, and fertilization rate were significantly higher in agonist group than antagonist group (p < 0.05). Implantation rate (IR), clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), and ongoing pregnancy rate (OPR) were significantly higher in antagonist group than agonist group (p < 0.05). However, there was no significant difference between both groups in relation with total follicle stimulating hormone (FSH).

CONCLUSION

GnRH agonist treatment seems to be associated with higher serum E2 and progesterone levels and resulted in lower pregnancy rates than antagonist treatment.

Effects of luteal estradiol pre-treatment on the outcome of IVF in poor ovarian responders

BACKGROUND

In view of the discrepancies about the luteal estradiol treatment before stimulation protocols having some potential advantages compared with the standard protocols in poor ovarian responders undergoing IVF, a meta-analysis of the published data was performed to compare the efficacy of the luteal estradiol pre-treatment protocols in IVF poor response patients.

METHODS

We searched for all published articles. The searches yielded 32 articles, from which seven studies met the inclusion criteria. We performed this meta-analysis involving 450 IVF patients in luteal estradiol pre-treatment protocol group and 606 patients in standard protocol group.

RESULTS

The luteal estradiol protocol resulted in a significantly higher duration of stimulation compared with the standard protocol. In addition, the number of oocytes retrieved and mature oocytes retrieved were significantly higher in the luteal estradiol protocols than those in the standard protocols. The cycle cancellation rate (CCR) in the luteal estradiol protocols was lower than the standard protocols. Moreover, no significant difference was found in the clinical pregnancy rate (CPR).

CONCLUSIONS

The addition of the estradiol in the luteal phase preceding IVF in poor responders improved IVF cycle outcomes, including increasing the number of oocytes retrieved and mature oocytes retrieved and decreasing the CCR.

In vitro fertilization stimulation protocol for normal responder patients

The aim of this prospective observational study is to determine the different outcomes of IVF/ICSI treatments after using antagonists or agonists of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) in normal responder patients. Two hundred forty-seven patients undergoing IVF treatment at the Centre of Reproductive Medicine, Rome (CERMER), from January 2005 to December 2008, were included in the study. Patients were stimulated either with a standard long protocol with GnRH agonists (n = 156) or with GnRH antagonists (n = 91). The use of GnRH antagonists resulted in a significant reduction in the duration of the stimulation (Agonist Group 14.10 ± 2.25 vs Antagonist Group 11.34 ± 2.11; p < 0.001) and in the amount of gonadotrophin (IU of r-FSH) needed (Agonist Group 1878 ± 1109 vs Antagonist Group 1331 ± 1049; p = 0.0014). Moreover a lower number of cycles were cancelled with the antagonist protocol (4.39 vs 6.41%). The GnRH antagonist protocol, when compared to the GnRH agonist one, is associated with a similar clinical pregnancy rate, similar implantation rate, significantly lower gonadotrophin requirement and shorter duration of stimulation. For this reason, GnRH antagonists might be a good treatment even for normal responder patients undergoing IVF.

GnRH antagonist versus long GnRH agonist protocol in poor IVF responders: a randomized clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of the long GnRH agonist and the fixed GnRH antagonist protocols in IVF poor responders.

STUDY DESIGN

This was a randomized controlled trial performed in the Iakentro IVF centre, Thessaloniki, from January 2007 to December 2011, concerning women characterised as poor responders after having 0-4 oocytes retrieved at a previous IVF cycle. They were assigned at random, using sealed envelopes, to either a long GnRH agonist protocol (group I) or a GnRH antagonist protocol (group II).

RESULTS

Overall 364 women fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were allocated to the two groups: finally 330 participated in our trial. Of these, 162 were treated with the long GnRH agonist protocol (group I), and 168 with the fixed GnRH antagonist protocol (group II). Numbers of embryos transferred and implantation rates were similar between the two groups (P=NS). The overall cancellation rate was higher in the antagonist group compared to the agonist group, but the difference was not significant (22.15% vs. 15.2%, P=NS). Although clinical pregnancy rates per transfer cycle were not different between the two groups (42.3% vs. 33.1%, P=NS), the clinical pregnancy rate per cycle initiated was significantly higher in the agonist compared to the antagonist group (35.8% vs. 25.6%, P=0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Although long GnRH agonist and fixed GnRH antagonist protocols seem to have comparable pregnancy rates per transfer in poor responders undergoing IVF, the higher cancellation rate observed in the antagonist group suggests the long GnRH agonist protocol as the first choice for ovarian stimulation in these patients.

Ovarian stimulation protocols in assisted reproductive technology: an update

Controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) with gonadotropins to produce multiple follicular development and high-quality oocytes is the cornerstone of assisted reproductive technology. Today, recombinant human follicle-stimulating hormone (r-hFSH) is widely used for COS. A long-acting r-hFSH and a combination of r-hFSH and recombinant human luteinizing hormone have recently become available. Formulations of purified urinary FSH with or without luteinizing hormone activity (provided by human chorionic gonadotropin) are also available. COS protocols can now be individualized to optimize efficacy and safety - defined as singleton pregnancies with a low incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. This is facilitated by an estimation of ovarian response using the antral follicle count and/or serum anti-Müllerian hormone levels; anti-Müllerian hormone is viewed as the most reliable single marker. However, an efficient management strategy for poor responders to COS is still required. Developments in biomarkers and other techniques for accurate identification of viable oocytes and embryos and optimal uterine receptivity are expected.

Comparison of different stimulation protocols efficacy in poor responders undergoing IVF: a retrospective study

PURPOSE

To compare the efficacy of different stimulation protocols on pregnancy outcomes in poor responders undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a retrospective study to compare the efficacy of four different protocols including gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist (long, short and miniflare) and GnRH antagonist on pregnancy outcomes in poor responders. This investigation was performed on 566 poor respond patients who were candidates for IVF. Main outcome measures included the total number of oocytes and mature oocytes retrieved, pregnancy rates, implantation and overall cancellation rates which were compared between four mentioned groups.

RESULTS

Number of follicles >18 mm on hCG day were significantly higher in GnRH-a long versus GnRH antagonist, GnRH-a short and GnRH-a miniflare protocols. The mean number of oocytes and mature oocytes retrieved were significantly higher in GnRH-a long versus miniflare (4.7 ± 3.05 versus 3.26 ± 2.9 and 3.69 ± 3.1 versus 2.65 ± 2.2, respectively). There were no significant differences in implantation, pregnancy and overall cancellation rates between four groups.

CONCLUSION

The present study suggests that the application of four different protocols in poor respond patients seem to have similar efficacy in improving clinical outcomes such as implantation, pregnancy rates and cancellation rate even though GnRH-a long protocol yielded more retrieved oocytes and mature oocytes compared to GnRH-a miniflare protocol.

Low-dose GnRH antagonist protocol is as effective as the long GnRH agonist protocol in unselected patients undergoing in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer

OBJECTIVE

The present retrospective and controlled comparative study was designed to evaluate the pregnancy rate achieved using a modified, fixed, multiple-dose 0.125mg gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol with the long GnRH agonist protocol as the control group.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

One hundred and twenty unselected women between 30 and 40 years of age, in their first cycle of IVF/ICSI, with a baseline follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) <10 IU and an antral follicle count >3 were assigned into two groups: (1) the study group received 0.125mg of cetrorelix daily starting on Day 6 of stimulation; and (2) the control group received leuprolide daily starting in the mid-luteal phase of the preceding cycle. Both groups were given a flexible dose of recombinant FSH for stimulation. An ongoing pregnancy rate of more than 12 weeks was the primary outcome measure of the study.

RESULTS

Primary and secondary outcomes were comparable in both groups. A shorter duration of stimulation, a lower dosage of recombinant FSH consumption and a thinner endometrium on the day of human chorionic gonadotropin administration were all observed in the GnRH antagonist group.

CONCLUSION

A dosage of 0.125mg GnRH antagonist protocol was effective for these unselected patients during IVF/ET.

Comparisons of GnRH antagonist versus GnRH agonist protocol in poor ovarian responders undergoing IVF

BACKGROUND

In view of the discrepancies about the GnRH antagonist (GnRH-ant) ovarian stimulation protocols having some potential advantages compared with the GnRH agonist (GnRH-a) protocols in poor ovarian responders IVF/ICSI, a meta-analysis of the published data was performed to compare the efficacy of GnRH-ant versus GnRH-a protocols for ovarian stimulation in IVF poor response patients.

METHODS

We searched for all published articles indexed in MEDLINE (1950-2010), EMBASE (1974-2010) and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI, 1994-2010). Any randomized controlled study that compared the GnRH-ant with GnRH-a in ovarian stimulation protocols for poor responders undergoing IVF/ICSI was included, and data were extracted independently by two reviewers. The searches yielded 64 articles, from which 14 studies met the inclusion criteria. We performed this meta-analysis involving 566 IVF patients in a GnRH-ant protocol group and 561 patients in a GnRH-a protocol group with Review Manager 4.2 software. Odds ratio (OR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were used to evaluate dichotomous and continuous data, respectively.

RESULTS

Fourteen eligible studies were included in this meta-analysis. GnRH-ant protocols resulted in a statistically significantly lower duration of stimulation compared with GnRH-a protocols (P = 0.04; WMD: -1.88, 95% CI: -3.64, -0.12), but there was no significant difference in the number of oocytes retrieved (P = 0.51; WMD: -0.17, 95% CI -0.69, 0.34) or the number of mature oocytes retrieved (P = 0.99; WMD: -0.01, 95% CI: -1.14, 1.12). Moreover, no significant difference was found in the cycle cancellation rate (CCR, P = 0.67; OR: 1.01, 95% CI: 0.71-1.42) or clinical pregnancy rate (CPR, P = 0.16; OR: 1.23, 95% CI: 0.92, 1.66).

CONCLUSIONS

Clear advantage was gained in duration of stimulation with GnRH-ant in poor ovarian responders undergoing IVF, although there was no statistical difference in the number of oocytes retrieved, the number of mature oocytes retrieved, the CCR and CPR between GnRH-ant and GnRH-a protocols. These results may be helpful to our clinical practice. However, further controlled randomized prospective studies with larger sample sizes are needed.

Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonists for assisted reproductive technology

BACKGROUND

Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists can be used to prevent a luteinizing hormone (LH) surge during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) without the hypo-estrogenic side-effects, flare-up, or long down-regulation period associated with agonists. The antagonists directly and rapidly inhibit gonadotropin release within several hours through competitive binding to pituitary GnRH receptors. This property allows their use at any time during the follicular phase. Several different regimes have been described including multiple-dose fixed (0.25 mg daily from day six to seven of stimulation), multiple-dose flexible (0.25 mg daily when leading follicle is 14 to 15 mm), and single-dose (single administration of 3 mg on day 7 to 8 of stimulation) protocols, with or without the addition of an oral contraceptive pill. Further, women receiving antagonists have been shown to have a lower incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). Assuming comparable clinical outcomes for the antagonist and agonist protocols, these benefits would justify a change from the standard long agonist protocol to antagonist regimens. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2001, and previously updated in 2006.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists with the standard long protocol of GnRH agonists for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in assisted conception cycle

SEARCH STRATEGY

We performed electronic searches of major databases, for example Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE (from 1987 to April 2010); and handsearched bibliographies of relevant publications and reviews, and abstracts of major scientific meetings, for example the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE) and American Society for Reproductive Medicine (ASRM). A date limited search of Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL from April 2010 to April 2011 was run. Eighteen studies have been entered into the Classification pending references section of this update. These studies will be appraised for inclusion or exclusion in the next update of this review, due April 2012.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Two review authors independently screened the relevant citations for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing different agonist versus antagonist protocols in women undergoing IVF or ICSI.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed trial risk of bias and extracted data. If relevant data were missing or unclear, the authors were contacted for clarification.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-five RCTs (n = 7511) comparing the antagonist to the long agonist protocols fulfilled the inclusion criteria. There was no evidence of a statistically significant difference in rates of live-births (9 RCTs; odds ratio (OR) 0.86, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.08) or ongoing pregnancy (28 RCTs; OR 0.87, 95% CI 0.77 to 1.00). There was a statistically significant lower incidence of OHSS in the GnRH antagonist group (29 RCTs; OR 0.43, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.57).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The use of antagonist compared with long GnRH agonist protocols was associated with a large reduction in OHSS and there was no evidence of a difference in live-birth rates.

A comparison of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist and GnRH agonist flare protocols for poor responders undergoing in vitro fertilization

OBJECTIVE

To compare stimulation profiles, pregnancy, and live birth rates in poor responders during in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles using either a gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist (cetrorelix) or a GnRH agonist flare protocol (leuprolide).

DESIGN

Retrospective chart review.

SETTING

A university-affiliated IVF program.

PATIENT(S)

Women designated as poor responders based on a prior stimulation cycle or baseline follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) level of >10 mIU/mL, who needed at least 375 IU of starting daily gonadotropins in the study cycle.

INTERVENTION(S)

Administration of GnRH agonist flare or GnRH antagonist protocol.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Clinical pregnancy rate, live birth rate.

RESULT(S)

For 68 GnRH antagonist and 45 GnRH agonist flare cycles, the groups were similar with respect to age (38.8 versus 38.6 years) and basal FSH concentration (8.33 versus 8.65 mIU/mL). No statistically significant differences between the protocol types were noted in peak estradiol levels, amount of gonadotropins used, number of oocytes obtained, or embryos transferred. The pregnancy rates (40% versus 45.2%) and live birth rates (27.7% versus 31.7%) in the GnRH antagonist and flare groups, respectively, were similar.

CONCLUSION(S)

We achieved excellent and comparable pregnancy and live birth rates in poor responders of advanced reproductive age with the use of either GnRH antagonist or flare protocol.

Comparison of microdose flare-up and antagonist multiple-dose protocols for poor-responder patients: a randomized study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of the microdose flare-up and multiple-dose antagonist protocols for poor-responder patients in intracytoplasmic sperm injection-ET cycles.

DESIGN

A randomized, prospective study.

SETTING

Center for assisted reproductive technology in Turkey.

PATIENT(S)

Ninety patients with poor ovarian response in a minimum of two previous IVF cycles.

INTERVENTION(S)

All women were prospectively randomized into two groups by computer-assisted randomization. The patients in group 1 were stimulated according to the microdose flare-up protocol (n = 45), while the patients in group 2 were stimulated according to antagonist multiple-dose protocol (n = 45).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

The mean number of mature oocytes retrieved was the primary outcome measure, and fertilization rate, implantation rate per embryo, and clinical pregnancy rates were secondary outcome measures.

RESULT(S)

The mean age of the women, the mean duration of infertility, basal FSH level, and the number of previous IVF cycles were similar in both groups. The total gonadotropin dose used was significantly higher in group 2, while the number of oocytes retrieved was significantly greater in group 1. Although the fertilization and clinical pregnancy rates were nonsignificantly higher in group 1 compared with group 2, the implantation rate was significantly higher in the microdose flare-up group than in the multiple-dose antagonist group (22% vs. 11%).

CONCLUSION(S)

The microdose flare-up protocol seems to have a better outcome in poor-responder patients, with a significantly higher mean number of mature oocytes retrieved and higher implantation rate.

The decrease of serum luteinizing hormone level by a gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist following the mild IVF stimulation protocol for IVF and its clinical outcome

PURPOSE

While performing the mild ovarian stimulation protocol with a GnRH antagonist, the pregnancy rate was compared between the groups, which were divided by the degree that the luteinizing hormone (LH) level decreased.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients aged 27 to 42years (36.1 +/- 3.79) underwent 308 IVF cycles who opted for IVF via the mild ovarian stimulation protocol began clomiphene citrate on day 3 and recombinant FSH on day 5. A GnRH antagonist was administered when the dominant follicle reached 14mm. Serum LH was measured at the time of GnRH antagonist administration and at the time of hCG injection. The pregnancy rate and implantation rate were compared between 50 cycles in which the LH level dropped less than one-third and the control (LH level within 1/3).

RESULT(S)

The pregnancy rate for the group in which the LH level fell less than one third was 18%. Conversely, the pregnancy rate for the control group was 39%. The implantation rate was 18% for the less than one-third group and 26% for the control group. Both the pregnancy rate and the implantation rate for the group in which the LH level fell less than one-third were significantly lower than that of control (p < 0.02).

CONCLUSION(S)

When performing the mild ovarian stimulation protocol, serum LH should be followed. If the serum LH level is less than one-third at the time of hCG injection, both the pregnancy rate and implantation rate are significantly lower.

Mild stimulation with clomiphene citrate in combination with recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone and gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist and its influence on serum estradiol level and pregnancy rate

Aim:  The mild ovarian stimulation protocol for in vitro fertilization (IVF) is carried out to minimize adverse side-effects as well as cost. While performing mild ovarian stimulation with a gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist, the pregnancy rate was examined in cases that exhibited a serum estradiol (E2) drop down. Methods:  In this study, 174 patients who requested mild ovarian stimulation for IVF began clomiphene citrate on day 3 and recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) on day 5 of their menstrual cycles. A GnRH antagonist was administered when the dominant follicle reached a diameter of 14 mm. Serum luteinizing hormone and estradiol were measured at the time of GnRH antagonist administration and at the time of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) injection. Pregnancy rates and implantation rates were compared between 24 cycles in which the E2 level fell at the time of hCG injection and 150 cycles in which it did not fall. Results:  The pregnancy rate in the cases in which the E2 level fell (25% decrease) at the time of hCG injection was significantly lower than it was in the cases in which it did not fall (16.7 vs 41.0%). The implantation rate for the cases in which the E2 level fell was also lower than that of the control group (7.0 vs 31.0%). There was no significant difference in the number of good-quality embryos between the two groups. Conclusion:  When performing the mild ovarian stimulation protocol, serum E2 should be followed. It is prudent to avoid embryo transfer in the same cycle in cases that exhibit E2 drop down. (Reprod Med Biol 2008; 7: 85-89).

Gonadotrophin releasing hormone antagonist in IVF/ICSI

OBJECTIVE

To study the efficacy of gonadotrophin releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist in In-vitro-fertilization/Intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI) cycles.

TYPE OF STUDY

Observational study.

SETTING

Reproductive Medicine Unit, Christian Medical College Hospital, Vellore, Tamil Nadu.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

GnRH antagonists were introduced into our practice in November 2005. Fifty-two women undergoing the antagonist protocol were studied and information gathered regarding patient profile, treatment parameters (total gonadotrophin dosage, duration of treatment, and oocyte yield), and outcomes in terms of embryological parameters (cleavage rates, implantation rates) and clinical pregnancy. These parameters were compared with 121 women undergoing the standard long protocol. The costs between the two groups were also compared.

MAIN OUTCOME

Clinical pregnancy rate.

RESULTS

The clinical pregnancy rate per embryo transfer in the antagonist group was 31.7% which was comparable to the clinical pregnancy rate in women undergoing the standard long protocol (30.63%). The costs between the two groups were comparable.

CONCLUSIONS

GnRH antagonist protocol was found to be effective and comparable to the standard long protocol regimen. In addition it was simple, convenient, and patient friendly.

Different ovarian stimulation protocols for women with diminished ovarian reserve

PURPOSE

To review the available treatments for women with significantly diminished ovarian reserve and assess the efficacy of different ovarian stimulation protocols.

METHODS

Literature research performed among studies that have been published in the Pubmed, in the Scopus Search Machine and in Cohrane database of systematic reviews.

RESULTS

A lack of clear, uniform definition of the poor responders and a lack of large-scale randomized studies make data interpretation very difficult for precise conclusions. Optimistic data have been presented by the use of high doses of gonadotropins, flare up Gn RH-a protocol (standard or microdose), stop protocols, luteal onset of Gn RH-a and the short protocol. Natural cycle or a modified natural cycle seems to be an appropriate strategy. Low dose hCG in the first days of ovarian stimulation has promising results. Molecular biology tools (mutations, single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs)) have been also considered to assist the management of this group of patients.

CONCLUSIONS

The ideal stimulation for these patients with diminished ovarian reserve remains a great challenge for the clinician, within the limits of our pharmaceutical quiver.

Role of gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonists in poor responders

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the role of GnRH antagonists in poor-responder protocols.

DESIGN

Literature review.

CONCLUSION(S)

The optimum stimulation protocol for poor responders is unknown. Although many IVF programs currently use GnRH antagonists for poor responders, there have been only four prospective, randomized trials comparing GnRH antagonists to alternate protocols. None of these studies had sufficient power to evaluate a difference in pregnancy rates (PRs), and in all four cases, IVF outcomes were comparable. Nevertheless, interest in the use of GnRH antagonists in poor responders has continued. GnRH antagonists may be associated with simpler stimulation protocols, lower gonadotropin requirements, reduced patient costs, and shorter downtimes between consecutive cycles. However, the greatest advantage of GnRH antagonists may lie in the ability to assess ovarian reserves immediately prior to deciding whether or not to initiate gonadotropin stimulation. The ability to respond to cycle-to-cycle variation in antral follicle counts may allow the optimization of oocyte yield and reduce cycle cancellation rates. It remains to be seen if this approach (initiating gonadotropins only in cycles where an adequate antral follicle count is present) also translates into higher clinical PRs for poor responders.

GnRH antagonists in ovarian stimulation for ICSI with oocyte restriction: a matched, controlled study

Italian legislation regarding reproductive medicine limits the number of embryos transferred per attempt to three. Thus, in order to achieve pregnancy, more IVF cycles may be required, generating a need for methods of ovarian stimulation with fewer side effects. The gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists have several advantages in this respect, but there is a debate regarding a possible lower pregnancy rate from resulting cycles. This study evaluated the clinical applicability of GnRH antagonists for ovarian stimulation in young women undergoing intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) in which only three oocytes can be fertilized. The 200 women treated with GnRH antagonist had a significantly shorter stimulation and lower gonadotrophin consumption, oestradiol concentration, total and mature oocyte recovery as compared with 200 matched controls treated with GnRH agonist. No differences were found between the groups in the number of normal zygotes, total cleaved, transferred and high quality embryos, or in the clinical outcomes. Thus, the previously reported lower pregnancy rate in GnRH antagonist cycles may be related to the oocyte characteristics. Finally, under conditions of oocyte number restriction, the GnRH antagonist-based cycles may be proposed as an efficacious, safe and minimally invasive alternative to GnRH agonist in a standard long protocol.

Cetrorelix in women with poor ovarian response in previous assisted reproduction cycles

Our aim was to compare a gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol with an analogue protocol using high dose gonadotrophins (rFSH) in women with poor ovarian response in order to optimise the management while undergoing assisted reproduction treatment. We recruited 31 consecutive patients over 5 months. The eligibility criteria for the study were: one or more previous cancelled cycle due to <or=3 follicles on day of hCG, or a total of >or=4,500 IU of rFSH. For the antagonist cycle regimen, we used daily 300 IU of rFSH from day 2 on the menses, and then from day 5 daily 0.25 mg of Cetrorelix until the day of human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG) administration. We demonstrated that the use of an antagonist cycle was associated with a reduction in cancellation rates from 48% (agonist) to 10% (antagonist) (p < 0.039) allowing women to undergoing oocyte retrieval and embryo transfer with a non-significant improvement in the pregnancy rates.

Hypopituitarism

Hypopituitarism is the partial or complete insufficiency of anterior pituitary hormone secretion and may result from pituitary or hypothalamic disease. The reported incidence (12-42 new cases per million per year) and prevalence (300-455 per million) is probably underestimated if its occurrence after brain injuries (30-70% of cases) is considered. Clinical manifestations depend on the extent of hormone deficiency and may be non specific, such as fatigue, hypotension, cold intolerance, or more indicative such as growth retardation or impotence and infertility in GH and gonadotropin deficiency, respectively.A number of inflammatory, granulomatous or neoplastic diseases as well as traumatic or radiation injuries involving the hypothalamic-pituitary region can lead to hypopituitarism. Several genetic defects are possible causes of syndromic and non syndromic isolated/multiple pituitary hormone deficiencies. Unexplained gonadal dysfunctions, developmental craniofacial abnormalities, newly discovered empty sella and previous pregnancy-associated hemorrhage or blood pressure changes may be associated with defective anterior pituitary function.The diagnosis of hypopituitarism relies on the measurement of basal and stimulated secretion of anterior pituitary hormones and of the hormones secreted by pituitary target glands. MR imaging of the hypothalamo-pituitary region may provide essential information. Genetic testing, when indicated, may be diagnostic.Secondary hypothyroidism is a rare disease. The biochemical diagnosis is suggested by low serum FT4 levels and inappropriately normal or low basal TSH levels that do not rise normally after TRH. L-thyroxine is the treatment of choice. Before starting replacement therapy, concomitant corticotropin deficiency should be excluded in order to avoid acute adrenal insufficiency. Prolactin deficiency is also very rare and generally occurs after global failure of pituitary function. Prolactin deficiency prevents lactation. Hypogonadotropic hypogonadism in males is characterized by low testosterone with low or normal LH and FSH serum concentrations and impaired spermatogenesis. Hyperprolactinemia as well as low sex hormone binding globulin concentrations enter the differential diagnosis. Irregular menses and amenorrhea with low serum estradiol concentration (<100 pmol/l) and normal or low gonadotropin concentrations are the typical features of hypogonadotropic hypogonadism in females. In post menopausal women, failure to detect high serum gonadotropin values is highly suggestive of the diagnosis. In males, replacement therapy with oral or injectable testosterone results in wide fluctuations of serum hormone levels. More recently developed transdermal testosterone preparations allow stable physiological serum testosterone levels. Pulsatile GnRH administration can be used to stimulate spermatogenesis in men and ovulation in women with GnRH deficiency and normal gonadotropin secretion. Gonadotropin administration is indicated in cases of gonadotropin deficiency or GnRH resistance but is also an option, in alternative to pulsatile GnRH, for patients with defective GnRH secretion.

Evaluating the role of exogenous luteinizing hormone in poor responders undergoing in vitro fertilization with gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonists

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the importance of exogenous LH in poor responders undergoing IVF with GnRH antagonists.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

University-based IVF center.

PATIENT(S)

All patients with a history of poor response to ovarian stimulation undergoing IVF with GnRH antagonists between September 2000 and August 2001.

INTERVENTION(S)

None.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Clinical pregnancy rates.

RESULT(S)

Two hundred forty GnRH-antagonist cycles were initiated in poor responders. One hundred fifty-three progressed to oocyte retrieval. Seventy-five patients received recombinant FSH (Rec) for ovarian stimulation, and 66 received hMG in combination with Rec. In patients aged <40 years, there were no significant differences in amount and duration of treatment, number of oocytes retrieved, and number of embryos between treatment groups. In patients aged > or =40 years, significantly fewer oocytes were retrieved in groups who received exogenous LH in their stimulation, resulting in significantly fewer fertilized embryos. Implantation and clinical pregnancy rates did not differ by treatment group.

CONCLUSION(S)

In poor responders undergoing IVF with GnRH antagonists, outcomes are comparable whether stimulation is achieved in the presence or absence of supplemental LH. Exogenous LH does not appear to be necessary to achieve pregnancy in these challenging patients and may be detrimental to older patients with a history of poor response.

Comparison of a gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist and GnRH agonist flare-up regimen in poor responders undergoing ovarian stimulation

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of flare-up and GnRH-antagonist treatment in poor-responder patients.

DESIGN

Randomized prospective study.

SETTING

Assisted reproduction center.

PATIENT(S)

Fifty-five poor-responder patients undergoing intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI).

INTERVENTION(S)

Thirty patients received GnRH agonist on the 1st day of menstruation, followed by exogenous gonadotropins from the 2nd day. Twenty-five patients received exogenous gonadotropins starting on the second day of menstruation, followed by GnRH antagonist when the leading follicle reached 14 mm in diameter.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

The total dose of FSH administered during the ovarian stimulation, as well as the number of mature oocytes retrieved, embryo quality, fertilization, implantation, and pregnancy rates were evaluated.

RESULT(S)

The number of ampules and units of FSH administered were significantly less in the flare-up than in the antagonistic group. The numbers of mature oocytes retrieved and of top-quality embryos transferred were significantly greater in the flare-up than in the GnRH-antagonist group. The fertilization rate (84% vs. 63%) was significantly higher in the flare-up than in the GnRH-antagonist group. The implantation and pregnancy rate were similar in the two groups.

CONCLUSION(S)

The flare-up protocol appears to be more effective than the GnRH-antagonist protocol in terms of mature oocytes retrieved, fertilization rate, and top-quality embryos transferred in poor-responder patients.

Modified natural cycle using GnRH antagonist can be an optional treatment in poor responders undergoing IVF

PURPOSE

To investigate the efficacy of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist supplementation during natural cycles in poor responders undergoing IVF-ET treatment.

METHODS

We retrospectively evaluated 540 cycles of 433 suitable patients who were divided by treatment protocol into modified natural, antagonist, and long agonist groups. There were 52 modified natural cycles with GnRH antagonist supplementation, 200 stimulated cycles with GnRH antagonist, and 288 long GnRH agonist cycles. Cycle characteristics and treatment outcomes were compared between the groups.

RESULTS

The mean number of oocytes retrieved in the modified natural group was significantly lower than in the stimulated antagonist and long agonist groups (1.4 +/- 0.5 vs. 2.3 +/- 1.1 and 2.5 +/- 1.1, respectively, p < 0.05). The respective implantation and pregnancy rates were 10% and 14.3%, 6.75% and 10.2%, and 7.4% and 10.6%. Cycle outcome and cycle properties were similar.

CONCLUSIONS

Modified natural IVF cycle with GnRH antagonist supplementation is a feasible alternative to ovarian stimulation protocols in poor responders.

GnRH antagonist versus long GnRH agonist protocol in poor responders undergoing IVF: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

This is the first published report of a prospective, randomized, controlled trial comparing a fixed, multi-dose GnRH antagonist protocol with a long GnRH agonist protocol in poor responders undergoing IVF.

METHODS

Sixty-six poor responders were randomized into two groups: the study group received 0.25 mg of cetrorelix daily starting on day 6 of stimulation; the control group received 600 microg of buserelin acetate daily starting in the mid-luteal phase of the preceding cycle. Both groups were given a fixed dose of recombinant FSH (300 IU daily) for stimulation.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in the cycle cancellation rates, duration of stimulation, consumption of gonadotrophins, and mean numbers of mature follicles, oocytes and embryos obtained. The implantation rates were similar, but the number of embryos transferred was significantly higher for the antagonist group (2.32 +/- 0.58 versus 1.50 +/- 0.83; P = 0.01). The pregnancy rates were also higher in the antagonist group, but the difference was not statistically significant.

CONCLUSION

A fixed multi-dose GnRH antagonist protocol is feasible for patients who are poor responders on a long agonist protocol; however, our study failed to demonstrate an overall improvement in ovarian responsiveness. Clinical outcomes may be improved by developing more flexible antagonist regimens, an approach that requires further evaluation.

Agonist “flare-up” versus antagonist in the management of poor responders undergoing in vitro fertilization treatment

OBJECTIVE

To compare the agonist flare-up and antagonist protocols in the management of poor responders to the standard long down-regulation protocol.

DESIGN

Retrospective comparative study.

SETTING

Assisted conception center.

PATIENT(S)

One hundred thirty-four patients undergoing IVF/ intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) treatment, who responded poorly to the standard long down-regulation protocol in their first treatment cycle. In the second cycle, 77 received short flare-up agonist and 57 received antagonist protocol. We analyzed the outcome of the second cycle.

INTERVENTION(S)

Peak serum E(2) was assayed on the day of hCG administration.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Cycle cancellation rate due to poor ovarian response.

RESULT(S)

There was no cycle cancellation in the flare-up protocol and 7% cancellation rate in the antagonist protocol due to lack of response. A significantly higher number of patients had embryo transfer in the flare-up protocol. There was no difference in pregnancy rate (PR) between the two groups.

CONCLUSION(S)

Both the flare-up and the antagonist protocols significantly improved the ovarian response of known poor responders. However, a significantly higher cycle cancellation rate and less patients having embryo transfer in the antagonist group tips the balance in favor of the flare-up protocol.

GnRH antagonists in IVF

The present review summarizes existing knowledge on the use of gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists based on experience gathered after the completion of phase III comparative trials with GnRH agonists. Available data suggest that prolongation of the follicular phase significantly decreases the probability of pregnancy. Moreover, patients with elevated progesterone at initiation of stimulation have significantly fewer chances of achieving an ongoing pregnancy. Luteal support remains mandatory, while the replacement of human chorionic gonadotrophin by GnRH agonist does not appear to be feasible. Although not conclusive, existing data are not in favour of increasing the starting dose of gonadotrophins, of LH supplementation or of using a flexible antagonist protocol.

GnRH antagonist in IVF poor-responder patients: results of a randomized trial

The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate the efficacy of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH) in comparison with the standard long protocol in poor-responder patients. Sixty patients with poor ovarian response in previous treatment cycles were randomized into two groups: group A (n = 30) was stimulated with a standard long protocol, and group B (n = 30) received GnRH antagonist. Vaginal ultrasound was performed to evaluate ovarian response. There was a significantly reduced duration of ovarian stimulation (9.8 +/- 0.8 versus 14.6 +/- 1.2, P = 0.001) in group B in comparison with group A, and a reduced number of ampoules was used in group B (49.3 +/- 4.3 versus 72.6 +/- 6.8, P = 0.0001). In group B, the number of oocytes retrieved was significantly higher than in group A (5.6 +/- 1.6 versus 4.3 +/- 2.2, P = 0.02) and there was an increased number of follicles with a diameter >15 mm at human chorionic gonadotrophin administration in group B (P = 0.0001). Fewer cycles were cancelled with the use of an antagonist protocol. Five pregnancies (17% for embryo transfer) were obtained with GnRH antagonist protocol and two (7% for embryo transfer) with GnRH agonist protocol.

Use of antagonists in ovarian stimulation protocols

Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists have been introduced in IVF to prevent premature LH surge. They bind competitively to pituitary receptors and prevent endogenous GnRH from exerting any stimulus on pituitary cells, avoiding the initial 'flare-up' effect and decreasing gonadotrophin secretion within a few hours. Pituitary reserve and gonadotrophin synthesis are not affected; therefore, the recovery of pituitary function is rapid. Two different regimes have been described. The multiple-dose protocol involves the administration of 0.25 mg cetrorelix (or ganirelix) daily from day 6-7 of stimulation, or when the leading follicle is 14-15 mm, until human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG) administration. The single-dose protocol involves the single administration of 3 mg cetrorelix on day 7-8 of stimulation. Both antagonists with either regimen seem to be equally effective in the prevention of the LH surge. Compared with a long luteal agonist protocol, the treatment is shorter and requires a smaller amount of gonadotrophins. Pregnancy rate seems to be lower, but a decrease in the incidence of severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) is reported by several studies. A promising aspect of antagonists may be the possibility of making treatment less aggressive. Finally, in antagonist cycles, ovulation triggering is possible by GnRH agonists, avoiding the deleterious effect of HCG and thus preventing OHSS.

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH)-antagonist versus GnRH-agonist in ovarian stimulation of poor responders undergoing IVF

PURPOSE

The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of GnRH-antagonists to GnRH-agonists in ovarian stimulation of poor responders undergoing IVF.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of our data revealed that 56 patients underwent treatment with a GnRH-agonist according to the flare-up protocol. Patients failing to achieve an ongoing pregnancy (n = 53) were subsequently treated in the next cycle with a GnRH-antagonist according to the multiple-dose protocol. Main outcome measures included the clinical pregnancy and implantation rates.

RESULTS

While ovulation induction characteristics and results did not differ between the two protocols, the number of embryos transferred was significantly higher (P = 0.046) in the GnRH-antagonist than in the GnRH-agonist stimulation protocol (2.5 +/- 1.6 vs. 2.0 +/- 1.4, respectively). The clinical pregnancy and implantation rates per transfer in the GnRH-antagonist group appeared higher than in the GnRH-agonist, but did not differ statistically (26.1 and 10.7 compared with 12.2 and 5.9%, respectively). However, the ongoing pregnancy rate per transfer was statistically significantly higher (P = 0.03) in the GnRH-antagonist than in the GnRH-agonist group (23.9 vs. 7.3%, respectively).

CONCLUSION

Applying GnRH-antagonists to ovarian stimulation protocols may offer new hope for IVF poor responder patients. However, further controlled randomized prospective studies with larger sample sizes are required to establish these results.

A novel protocol of ovulation induction with delayed gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist administration combined with high-dose recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone and clomiphene citrate for poor responders and women over 35 years

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the efficacy of a novel protocol of ovulation induction for poor responders.

DESIGN

Prospective, controlled, clinical study.

SETTING

Research institute's reproductive unit.

PATIENT(S)

One hundred forty-five infertile women, aged 27-39 years, candidates for assisted reproductive techniques (ART).

INTERVENTION(S)

Before undergoing ART, 85 patients received clomiphene citrate, high-dose recombinant human FSH, and a delayed, multidose GnRH antagonist, whereas 60 patients underwent a standard long protocol.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Estradiol levels (pg/mL), cancellation rate, oocyte retrieval, embryo score, and fertilization and pregnancy rates.

RESULT(S)

Patients undergoing the study protocol obtained lower cancellation rates (4.7% vs. 34%) and higher E(2) levels (945.88 +/- 173.2 pg/mL vs. 169.55 +/- 45.07 pg/mL), oocyte retrieval (5.56 +/- 1.13 vs. 3.36 +/- 1.3), and pregnancy (22.2% vs. 15.3%) and implantation rates (13.5% vs. 7.6%) compared with those receiving the long protocol. Age negatively correlated with ovarian response in the latter, whereas the ovarian outcome results were comparable in younger (<35 yrs) and older (>35 yrs) women treated with the study protocol.

CONCLUSION(S)

The proposed protocol of ovulation induction can be usefully administered in poor responders as well as in aged woman, probably because the delayed administration of GnRH antagonist prevents its adverse effects on ovarian paracrine activity and on oocyte maturation.

State of the art in in-vitro oocyte maturation

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The recovery of immature oocytes followed by in-vitro maturation (IVM) and in-vitro fertilization is an attractive alternative to conventional in-vitro fertilization treatment in which controlled ovarian stimulation with gonadotropins is used to increase the number of available oocytes and embryos. Significant progress has been made to improve pregnancy and implantation rates from in-vitro matured oocytes. This review summarizes current knowledge and achievements in human oocyte in-vitro maturation for clinical application, and will highlight recent advances reported in in-vitro maturation treatment.

RECENT FINDINGS

It has been demonstrated that priming of ovarian immature oocytes with follicle-stimulating hormone or human chorionic gonadotropin prior to immature oocyte retrieval improves oocyte maturation rates and embryo quality as well as pregnancy rates in infertile women with polycystic ovaries or polycystic ovary syndrome. The size of follicles may be important for the subsequent embryonic development, but the developmental competence of oocytes derived from the small antral follicles is not adversely affected by the presence of a dominant follicle. However oocyte maturation in vitro is profoundly affected by culture conditions. Currently more than 300 healthy infants have been born following immature oocyte retrieval and in-vitro maturation. In general, the clinical pregnancy and implantation rates have reached 30-35% and 10-15% respectively in infertile women with polycystic ovaries or polycystic ovary syndrome.

SUMMARY

In-vitro maturation treatment can now be offered as a successful option to infertile women with polycystic ovaries or polycystic ovary syndrome. It is possible to combine natural cycle in-vitro fertilization with immature oocyte retrieval followed by in-vitro maturation, and thus offer women with various causes of infertility reasonable pregnancy and implantation rates without recourse to ovarian stimulation. Further research remains to be done to address the mechanism of oocyte maturation in order to refine culture conditions and improve the implantation rate of oocytes matured in vitro.

Comparison of two different starting multiple dose gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist protocols in a selected group of in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer patients

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of two starting protocols of multiple dose GnRH antagonists (GnRH-a).

DESIGN

Prospective randomized controlled study.

SETTING

In vitro fertilization-embryo transfer program at the Instituto Valenciano de Infertilidad, Valencia, Spain.

PATIENT(S)

One hundred nine patients undergoing controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) with recombinant gonadotropins and GnRH-a (0.25 mg/d).

INTERVENTION(S)

Patients started GnRH-a administration on stimulation day 6 (group 1) or when the leading follicle reached a mean diameter of 14 mm (group 2).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Implantation and pregnancy rates; serum E(2) and LH levels during ovarian stimulation; days of stimulation and GnRH-a administration.

RESULT(S)

Days needed for ovarian stimulation were similar in both groups but there was a significant difference when comparing days of GnRH-a administration. Serum E(2) and LH followed similar curves in both groups. Implantation and pregnancy rates were 23.7% and 44.4 % in group 1 and 28.6% and 50.9 % in group 2 (P=not significant [NS]).

CONCLUSION(S)

The efficacy of the two starting protocols of the multiple dose GnRH-a evaluated in this study is similar; however, this remark can only be drawn for a selected group of patients.

Triptorelin versus cetrorelix in intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles in women with a single ovary

OBJECTIVE

To compare the response to ovarian stimulation with either the long protocol of a GnRH-agonist or the multiple protocol of a GnRH-antagonist, in women with a single ovary who underwent intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective study including 75 ICSI cycles from 26 women. Sixty-three cycles were stimulated with triptorelin/hMG or rFSH, whereas 12 cycles were stimulated with cetrorelix/hMG or rFSH.

RESULTS

There was not found any statistical significant difference between the two groups regarding the days of stimulation, the number of gonadotropins' ampoules, the peak estradiol levels, the number of aspirated follicles and the number of retrieved oocytes. The fertilization rate, the number of transferred embryos as well as the cumulative embryo score were also similar in both groups.

CONCLUSION

The multiple stimulation protocol of cetrorelix is equally effective with the long protocol of triptorelin in the ovarian stimulation of women with a single ovary.

Pregnancies and births achieved from in vitro matured oocytes retrieved from poor responders undergoing stimulation in in vitro fertilization cycles

OBJECTIVE

To describe pregnancies that resulted from in vitro matured oocytes derived from stimulated IVF cycles before cancellation owing to poor response of gonadotropins.

DESIGN

Case report. University hospital.

PATIENT(S)

Eight patients who underwent in vitro maturation.Immature oocyte retrieval, in vitro maturation of immature oocytes, fertilization, and ET. Luteal support with progesterone and plvyeron was given.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Pregnancy and live birth.

RESULT(S)

Three pregnancies (two live births and another ongoing) were achieved after immature oocyte retrieval, in vitro maturation, fertilization with ICSI, and ET.

CONCLUSION(S)

Immature oocyte retrieval from poor responders during stimulation, followed by in vitro maturation, may be an alternative before the cycle is canceled.

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonists: impact of IVF practice and potential non-assisted reproductive technology applications

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To provide the clinician with updated knowledge of the most recent findings on the clinical use of gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonists.

RECENT FINDINGS

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonists, which have recently been introduced in clinical practice, cause an immediate suppression of gonadotropin secretion by competitive blocking of pituitary gonadotropin-releasing hormone receptors. Thus, they are effective in preventing the premature luteinizing hormone surges during ovarian stimulation for in-vitro fertilization and may improve the patient's response to lower doses of gonadotropins. Better patient acceptance, shorter treatment cycles and fewer follicles and oocytes are also reported. Data existing so far concerning the necessity of luteal phase support after the use of gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonists show that it might not be mandatory when used in clomiphene citrate costimulated cycles or in intrauterine insemination cycles. The use of gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonists seems to be safe for pregnant women and their offspring. All sex-hormone-dependent disorders, currently treated with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists, may in future be indications for a gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist, including endometriosis, leiomyoma, and breast cancer in women, benign prostatic hypertrophy and prostatic carcinoma in men, and central precocious puberty in children. The vast majority of the available clinical data up till now, however, are in assisted reproduction and prostate cancer.

SUMMARY

It is expected that the availability of gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist will lead to the use of 'softer' ovarian stimulation protocols, which will be shorter, cheaper and safer compared with the conventional protocols.

The impact of LH serum concentration on the clinical outcome of IVF cycles in patients receiving two regimens of clomiphene citrate/gonadotrophin/0.25 mg cetrorelix

Clomiphene citrate treatment with the association of gonadotrophins and the GnRH antagonist cetrorelix 0.25mg was analysed in two different stimulation protocols for IVF. In protocol I, 18 patients were sequentially stimulated with clomiphene citrate and gonadotrophins. In protocol II, 28 patients started the gonadotrophin injections during the clomiphene citrate administration. LH values significantly dropped after the first 0.25 mg cetrorelix injection in both protocols. A total of 22% and 7% of cycles were cancelled in protocols I and II, respectively, because of poor follicular development. The clinical pregnancy rate following embryo transfer was 18.1% in protocol I and 29.1% in protocol II. In two (11.1%) cycles stimulated according to protocol I and in eight (28.5%) cycles from protocol II, premature LH surges occurred. In patients with premature LH surge, significantly fewer metaphase II oocytes were obtained. The clinical pregnancy rate following embryo transfer was 12.5% in patients with surge compared with 29.6% in patients without. LH values were lower before HCG injection in patients who achieved pregnancy in the study cycle. In conclusion, sequential clomiphene citrate and gonadotrophin administration is not recommended for clomiphene citrate/gonadotrophin/cetrorelix 0.25 cycles. Cetrorelix 0.25 mg/day was associated with a high incidence of premature LH surges and premature LH surges were associated with an adverse cycle outcome.

Ovarian stimulation by clomiphene citrate and hMG in combination with cetrorelix acetate for ICSI cycles

BACKGROUND

The introduction of GnRH antagonists such as cetrorelix acetate has made possible the simplification of ovarian stimulation. However, the most effective protocol for their administration has not yet been clearly defined.

METHODS

Forty women with male-factor infertility undergoing 40 ICSI cycles were included in the study. Clomiphene citrate at 100 mg a day was given from cycle day 3 through day 7. hMG at 150 IU was given on cycle days 4, 6 and 8, and was adjusted from day 9 according to the follicular and hormone responses. Cetrorelix acetate at 2.5 mg was administered when the leading follicle reached 14 mm. The remaining 0.5 mg was divided into two 0.25 mg injections for possible later use. Serum FSH, LH, estradiol and progesterone levels were measured daily from the day of cetrorelix acetate injection until hCG was given.

RESULTS

Serum LH level was suppressed effectively for 4 days. Four patients (10%) needed one or two additional injections of 0.25 mg cetrorelix acetate. No premature LH surge was detected in any of the women treated. Sixteen women became pregnant (40%), of which 14 pregnancies (35%) were ongoing at the time of writing.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that this new protocol is feasible for couples with male-factor infertility undergoing ICSI.