A prospective trial comparing oocyte donor ovarian response and recipient pregnancy rates between suppression with gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) alone and dual suppression with a contraceptive vaginal ring and GnRH

Single or double embryo transfer? Decision-making process in patients participating in an oocyte donation program

In IVF/ICSI programs, after receiving the information about the success results of single embryo transfer (SET) vs double embryo transfer (DET) and the risks of multiple pregnancy, a significant number of patients opt for SET. Up to date, no comparable studies have been published in oocyte recipients. The aim of this study was to evaluate if the counseling provided to oocyte recipients influence their decision on the number of embryos to be transferred. Fifty-five recipients expressed their preference and the relevance for the decision-making process that they attribute to certain factors through an anonymous questionnaire completed pre and post-counseling. Before counseling, 32 out of 55 recipients preferred DET, 13 preferred SET and 10 were undecided. From the 32 recipients who preferred DET, 16 (50%) maintained their preference after counseling, 13 (40.6%) changed their decision to SET and 3 (9.4%) changed to undecided (McNemar's test: p < .05). After counseling, the patients attached less importance to the probability of pregnancy and more importance to maternal and perinatal risks (p < .05). We conclude that after counseling, a significant number of recipients changed their preferences from DET to SET.

Ovarian stimulation for freeze-all IVF cycles: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Freeze-all IVF cycles are becoming increasingly prevalent for a variety of clinical indications. However, the actual treatment objectives and preferred treatment regimens for freeze-all cycles have not been clearly established.

OBJECTIVE AND RATIONALE

We aimed to conduct a systematic review of all aspects of ovarian stimulation for freeze-all cycles.

SEARCH METHODS

A comprehensive search in Medline, Embase and The Cochrane Library was performed. The search strategy included keywords related to freeze-all, cycle segmentation, cumulative live birth rate, preimplantation genetic diagnosis, preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy, fertility preservation, oocyte donation and frozen-thawed embryo transfer. We included relevant studies published in English from 2000 to 2018.

OUTCOMES

Our search generated 3292 records. Overall, 69 articles were included in the final review. Good-quality evidence indicates that in freeze-all cycles the cumulative live birth rate increases as the number of oocytes retrieved increases. Although the risk of severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) is virtually eliminated in freeze-all cycles, there are certain risks associated with retrieval of large oocyte cohorts. Therefore, ovarian stimulation should be planned to yield between 15 and 20 oocytes. The early follicular phase is currently the preferred starting point for ovarian stimulation, although luteal phase stimulation can be used if necessary. The improved safety associated with the GnRH antagonist regimen makes it the regimen of choice for ovarian stimulation in freeze-all cycles. Ovulation triggering with a GnRH agonist almost completely eliminates the risk of OHSS without affecting oocyte and embryo quality and is therefore the trigger of choice. The addition of low-dose hCG in a dual trigger has been suggested to improve oocyte and embryo quality, but further research in freeze-all cycles is required. Moderate-quality evidence indicates that in freeze-all cycles, a moderate delay of 2–3 days in ovulation triggering may result in the retrieval of an increased number of mature oocytes without impairing the pregnancy rate. There are no high-quality studies evaluating the effects of sustained supraphysiological estradiol (E2) levels on the safety and efficacy of freeze-all cycles. However, no significant adverse effects have been described. There is conflicting evidence regarding the effect of late follicular progesterone elevation in freeze-all cycles.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS

Ovarian stimulation for freeze-all cycles is different in many aspects from conventional stimulation for fresh IVF cycles. Optimisation of ovarian stimulation for freeze-all cycles should result in enhanced treatment safety along with improved cumulative live birth rates and should become the focus of future studies.

Oral contraceptive pill, progestogen or oestrogen pretreatment for ovarian stimulation protocols for women undergoing assisted reproductive techniques

BACKGROUND

Among subfertile women undergoing assisted reproductive technology (ART), hormone pills given before ovarian stimulation may improve outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

To determine whether pretreatment with the combined oral contraceptive pill (COCP) or with a progestogen or oestrogen alone in ovarian stimulation protocols affects outcomes in subfertile couples undergoing ART.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases from inception to January 2017: Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register, The Cochrane Central Register Studies Online, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO. We also searched the reference lists of relevant articles and registers of ongoing trials.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of hormonal pretreatment in women undergoing ART.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures recommended by Cochrane. The primary review outcomes were live birth or ongoing pregnancy and pregnancy loss.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 29 RCTs (4701 women) of pretreatment with COCPs, progestogens or oestrogens versus no pretreatment or alternative pretreatments, in gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist or antagonist cycles. Overall, evidence quality ranged from very low to moderate. The main limitations were risk of bias and imprecision. Most studies did not describe their methods in adequate detail. Combined oral contraceptive pill versus no pretreatmentWith antagonist cycles in both groups the rate of live birth or ongoing pregnancy was lower in the pretreatment group (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.58 to 0.95; 6 RCTs; 1335 women; I² = 0%; moderate quality evidence). There was insufficient evidence to determine whether the groups differed in rates of pregnancy loss (OR 1.36, 95% CI 0.82 to 2.26; 5 RCTs; 868 women; I² = 0%; moderate quality evidence), multiple pregnancy (OR 2.21, 95% CI 0.53 to 9.26; 2 RCTs; 125 women; I² = 0%; low quality evidence), ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS; OR 0.98, 95% CI 0.28 to 3.40; 2 RCTs; 642 women; I² = 0%, low quality evidence), or ovarian cyst formation (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.08 to 2.75; 1 RCT; 64 women; very low quality evidence).In COCP plus antagonist cycles versus no pretreatment in agonist cycles, there was insufficient evidence to determine whether the groups differed in rates of live birth or ongoing pregnancy (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.64 to 1.25; 4 RCTs; 724 women; I² = 0%; moderate quality evidence), multiple pregnancy (OR 1.36, 95% CI 0.85 to 2.19; 4 RCTs; 546 women; I² = 0%; moderate quality evidence), or OHSS (OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.20 to 1.96; 2 RCTs; 290 women, I² = 0%), but there were fewer pregnancy losses in the pretreatment group (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.72; 5 RCTs; 780 women; I² = 0%; moderate quality evidence). There were no data suitable for analysis on ovarian cyst formation.One small study comparing COCP versus no pretreatment in agonist cycles showed no clear difference between the groups for any of the reported outcomes. Progestogen versus no pretreatmentAll studies used the same protocol (antagonist, agonist or gonadotrophins) in both groups. There was insufficient evidence to determine any differences in rates of live birth or ongoing pregnancy (agonist: OR 1.35, 95% CI 0.69 to 2.65; 2 RCTs; 222 women; I² = 24%; low quality evidence; antagonist: OR 0.67, 95% CI 0.18 to 2.54; 1 RCT; 47 women; low quality evidence; gonadotrophins: OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.09 to 4.23; 1 RCT; 42 women; very low quality evidence), pregnancy loss (agonist: OR 2.26, 95% CI 0.67 to 7.55; 2 RCTs; 222 women; I² = 0%; low quality evidence; antagonist: OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.06 to 2.09; 1 RCT; 47 women; low quality evidence; gonadotrophins: OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.06 to 17.12; 1 RCT; 42 women; very low quality evidence) or multiple pregnancy (agonist: no data available; antagonist: OR 1.05, 95% CI 0.06 to 17.76; 1 RCT; 47 women; low quality evidence; gonadotrophins: no data available). Three studies, all using agonist cycles, reported ovarian cyst formation: rates were lower in the pretreatment group (OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.32; 374 women; I² = 1%; moderate quality evidence). There were no data on OHSS. Oestrogen versus no pretreatmentIn antagonist or agonist cycles, there was insufficient evidence to determine whether the groups differed in rates of live birth or ongoing pregnancy (antagonist versus antagonist: OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.17; 2 RCTs; 502 women; I² = 0%; low quality evidence; antagonist versus agonist: OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.50; 2 RCTs; 242 women; I² = 0%; very low quality evidence), pregnancy loss (antagonist versus antagonist: OR 0.16, 95% CI 0.02 to 1.47; 1 RCT; 49 women; very low quality evidence; antagonist versus agonist: OR 1.59, 95% CI 0.62 to 4.06; 1 RCT; 220 women; very low quality evidence), multiple pregnancy (antagonist versus antagonist: no data available; antagonist versus agonist: OR 2.24, 95% CI 0.09 to 53.59; 1 RCT; 22 women; very low quality evidence) or OHSS (antagonist versus antagonist: no data available; antagonist versus agonist: OR 1.54, 95% CI 0.25 to 9.42; 1 RCT; 220 women). Ovarian cyst formation was not reported. Head-to-head comparisonsCOCP was compared with progestogen (1 RCT, 44 women), and with oestrogen (2 RCTs, 146 women), and progestogen was compared with oestrogen (1 RCT, 48 women), with an antagonist cycle in both groups. COCP in an agonist cycle was compared with oestrogen in an antagonist cycle (1 RCT, 25 women). Data were scant but there was no clear evidence that any of the groups differed in rates of live birth or ongoing pregnancy, pregnancy loss or other adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Among women undergoing ovarian stimulation in antagonist protocols, COCP pretreatment was associated with a lower rate of live birth or ongoing pregnancy than no pretreatment. There was insufficient evidence to determine whether rates of live birth or ongoing pregnancy were influenced by pretreatment with progestogens or oestrogens, or by COCP pretreatment using other stimulation protocols. Findings on adverse events were inconclusive, except that progesterone pretreatment may reduce the risk of ovarian cysts in agonist cycles, and COCP in antagonist cycles may reduce the risk of pregnancy loss compared with no pretreatment in agonist cycles.

Obstetric and perinatal complications in an oocyte donation programme. Is it time to limit the number of embryos to transfer?

The aim of this study is to describe obstetric and perinatal complications in pregnancies from oocyte donation (OD) cycles, delivering in our centre and to determine the impact of maternal age. Retrospective observational study of a 225 singleton pregnancies, 113 multiple pregnancies and 447 live birth. Pearson's χ(2) test or Fisher's exact test were used for the statistical analysis. A higher incidence of obstetric complications was observed in multiple compared to singleton pregnancies with regard to preeclampsia (24.8% versus 8%), premature rupture of membranes (9.7% versus 1.8%), preterm delivery at <37 weeks (54.9% versus 10.2%) and caesarean section (81.4% versus 64%) (p < 0.05). If the age factor is added, the caesarean sections are higher in the single pregnancy group aged ≥40 years than in the group of <40 years (73.5% versus 49.4%) (p < 0.05). A higher incidence is found in multiple versus singleton pregnancies for low birth weight (<2500 g) (61.1% versus 8.2%), admissions to the intensive care unit (15.2% versus 4.7%) and perinatal mortality (13.5‰ versus 0‰) (p < 0.05). It is necessary to consider preconception counselling prior to an OD cycle to inform patients about the incidence complications observed and recommend to transfer only a single embryo.

Is it justified to transfer two embryos in oocyte donation? A pilot randomized clinical trial

Multiple pregnancies involve high obstetric and perinatal risks. The aim of this study is to evaluate, in a pilot randomized control study, if the cumulative pregnancy and live birth rates of elective single embryo transfer (eSET) are comparable to the ones obtained with elective double embryo transfer (eDET). A total of 65 patients with at least two good quality embryos was randomized, 34 (52.3%) assigned to the eSET group and 31 (47.7%) to the eDET group. The cumulative pregnancy rates (eSET: 73.5% and eDET: 77.4%. RR: 0.95 95% CI: 0.72-1.25) and live birth rates (eSET: 58.8% and eDET: 61.3%. RR: 0.96 95% CI: 0.64-1.42) were similar in the two groups. The twin pregnancy rate in the fresh transfers of eDET group was 47.7% and 0% in the eSET group. The medical team decided to interrupt the study for reasons related to risks associated with elevated twin pregnancy rate, leaving low numbers of patients within the study as a result. When considering cumulative success rates, eSET and eDET are similar in terms of efficacy. However, eDET involves an increased and unacceptable twin pregnancy rate. The only prevention strategy is single embryo transfer.

Live birth using vitrified--warmed oocytes in invasive ovarian cancer: case report and literature review

This article reports the live birth of a healthy newborn using vitrified-warmed oocytes in a young patient with invasive mucinous ovarian carcinoma (stage Ic). Diagnosis was performed after a laparoscopic left adnexectomy. She underwent two cycles of ovarian stimulation, and 14 oocytes were vitrified before fertility-sparing surgery with uterus preservation went ahead. One year later, a transfer of two embryos was performed after insemination of warmed oocytes. Eighteen days after the transfer, she underwent a laparotomy because of abdominal pain, vaginal bleeding and haemoperitoneum. A right cornual ectopic pregnancy in the uterus was diagnosed and a wedge resection was performed to resolve it. One week later, a viable intrauterine pregnancy was confirmed under ultrasound. An elective Caesarean section was performed at week 38 of gestation, resulting in the birth of a healthy boy weighing 2650 g. As far as is known, this is the first live birth reported through vitrified-warmed oocytes in a patient with invasive ovarian cancer. Although oocyte vitrification is an alternative to be considered for fertility preservation in highly selected cases of ovarian cancer, controversial issues are discussed. Fertility preservation is a proven possibility in some cancer patients according to their age, disease and time available until the beginning of their oncological treatment. Although oocyte vitrification is an alternative to be considered for fertility preservation in highly selected cases of ovarian cancer, no live birth has been reported. We report the live birth of a healthy newborn through vitrified-warmed oocytes in a young patient with invasive mucinous ovarian carcinoma (stage Ic). Diagnosis was performed after a laparoscopic left adnexectomy. She underwent two cycles of ovarian stimulation, and 14 oocytes were vitrified before fertility-sparing surgery with uterus preservation went ahead. One year later, a transfer of two embryos was performed after the insemination of the warmed oocytes. Eighteen days after the transfer she underwent a laparotomy because of abdominal pain, vaginal bleeding and haemoperitoneum. A right cornual ectopic pregnancy in the uterus was diagnosed and a wedge resection was performed to resolve it. One week later, a viable intrauterine pregnancy was confirmed under ultrasound. An elective Caesarean section was performed at week 38 of gestation, resulting in the birth of a healthy boy weighing 2650 g. To our knowledge, this is the first live birth reported using vitrified-warmed oocytes in invasive ovarian cancer. Controversial issues are reviewed and discussed.

Investigations into implantation failure in oocyte-donation recipients

In recent decades, the Western world has been experiencing a societal trend to prioritize the professional careers of women who postpone motherhood to about 40 years of age, when, unfortunately, natural reproductive potential declines. This is the reason why these women increasingly find it necessary to resort to oocyte donation to have a child. Thanks to the young age of the donors, the efficacy of oocyte donation is the highest of all assisted reproduction treatments and pregnancy rates achieved with this technique exceed 50%. Moreover, the large registries from ESHRE and ASRM show live birth rates close to this figure. However, there are patients who experience repeated failures in several oocyte-donation cycles, and so far oocyte-donation repeated implantation failure has not been clearly defined. This study analysed the results obtained from 2531 oocyte-donation cycles carried out in 1990 patients and defines oocyte-donation repeated implantation failure as failure to implant with more than two embryo transfers and more than four high-grade embryos transferred. This study observed this condition in 140 oocyte recipients (7%). Also, oocyte cohort size, uterine factors and systemic thrombophilias as important aetiological factors were identified were to offer new therapeutic strategies to patients.

Triggering ovulation with 250 μg or 500 μg of r-hCG in oocyte donors treated with antagonist protocol has no effect on the number of mature oocytes retrieved: a randomized clinical trial

The aim of this study is to compare two r-hCG doses to trigger ovulation (250 μg vs. 500 μg of r-hCG) in an oocyte donation program. A prospective, randomized study was conducted in 118 oocyte donors. Group DI received 250 μg and Group DII received 500 μg of r-hCG. Both the groups were homogeneous. No significant differences were found in the total dose of gonadotropins, duration of the treatment, total number of oocytes, or Metaphase II (MII)oocytes. The pregnancy rate per embryo transfer in the corresponding recipients was similar for both the groups (58.2% for DII recipients and 56.1% for DI recipients). Mild hyperstimulation was observed in 17 donors in Group DI (29%) and in 23 donors in Group DII (39%). No cases of severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (SOHSS) were observed. In conclusion, a double dose of r-hCG in oocyte donors to trigger ovulation after stimulation with r-FSH and antagonist does not translate into a higher number of MII oocytes retrieved or into higher pregnancy rates among recipients. Our results confirm that the optimal dose to induce the final oocyte maturation with r-hCG is 250 μg, and that a higher dose does not add any benefit.

Elective single embryo transfer and cumulative pregnancy rate: five-year experience in a Southern European Country

To compare cumulative pregnancy and live birth rates of single embryo transfer (SET) vs. double embryo transfer (DET) in women <35 years old with good-quality embryos, we designed an observational prospective study carried out between October 2002 and December 2006. Patients who accepted SET were compared with those who decided DET. A total of 628 couples who underwent embryo transfers met the criteria for SET: 52% accepted it, while 47.8% asked for DET. Implantation rate was higher in SET, 46.6% (p < 0.05), whereas pregnancy rate (PR) per transfer was higher in DET, 38.3% (p < 0.05). Twin PR in DET was 26.4% compared with 0.7% in SET (p < 0.05). SET group performed 278 frozen embryo transfer and DET 128. The mean of embryos transferred was the same, resulting in similar pregnancy and twin PR (SET: 24.8% and 21.7% vs. DET: 25.0% and 28.1%). Cumulative PR was 66.2% in SET and 69.7% in DET, not showing significant differences (NS). Likewise, cumulative live birth rates did not show differences. Cumulative twin PR in SET was 7.2% and in DET 26.6%, (p < 0.05). Cumulative PR over time leveled at 15-18 months follow-up in both groups. In Conclusion, in order to reduce twins we support the promotion of SET.

Oral contraceptive pill, progestogen or estrogen pre-treatment for ovarian stimulation protocols for women undergoing assisted reproductive techniques

BACKGROUND

For many subfertile women, assisted reproductive techniques (ART) is the only hope for a pregnancy and live birth. The combined oral contraceptive pill (OCP) given prior to the hormone therapy in an IVF cycle may result in better pregnancy outcomes of ART.

OBJECTIVES

To assess whether pre-treatment with combined OCPs, progestogens or estrogens in ovarian stimulation protocols affects outcomes in subfertile couples undergoing ART.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Specialised Register, The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO. Other electronic resources on the Internet, reference list of relevant articles were also searched as well as the ESHRE abstracts (2008). All these searches were conducted in November 2008.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of pre-treatment with combined OCP, progestogen or estrogen in subfertile women undergoing IVF/ICSI.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted the data and assessed risk of bias. We calculated Peto odds ratios for dichotomous data and weighted mean difference for continuous variables. Authors of trials were contacted in case of missing data.

MAIN RESULTS

No evidence of effect was found with regard to the number of live births when using a pre-treatment. However, the combined OCP in GnRH antagonist cycles, compared to no pre-treatment, is associated with fewer clinical pregnancies (Peto OR 0.69, P = 0.03) and more days and a higher amount of gonadotrophin therapy (respectively: MD 1.44, P < 0.00001; and MD 691.69, P < 0.00001). Also compared to placebo or no pre-treatment, a progestogen pre-treatment in GnRH agonist cycles, is associated with more clinical pregnancies (Peto OR 1.95, P = 0.007) and fewer ovarian cysts (Peto OR 0.21, P < 0.00001). At last, in estrogen pre-treated GnRH antagonist cycles, compared to no pre-treatment, more oocytes are retrieved (MD 2.01, P < 0.00001), but a higher amount of gonadotrophin therapy is needed (MD 207.08, P < 0.00001). For the other outcomes no evidence of effect was found or there were not enough studies available in the subgroup for pooling.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was evidence of improved pregnancy outcomes with progestogen pre-treatment and poorer pregnancy outcomes with a combined OCP pre-treatment. However, we conclude that major changes in ART protocols should not be made at this time, since the number of overall studies in the subgroups is small and reporting of the major outcomes is inadequate.

Prospective, randomized, comparative study of leuprorelin + human menopausal gonadotropins versus ganirelix + recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone in oocyte donors and pregnancy rates among the corresponding recipients

AIM

To compare the clinical pregnancy rate in recipients of oocytes from donors treated with leuprorelin + human menopausal gonadotropins (hMG) with that obtained when the donors were treated with ganirelix + recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone (rFSH). The secondary aim was to compare the donors' response to the two treatments.

METHOD

A prospective, randomized, comparative study was conducted between January 2005 and November 2006 in a private hospital. Donors were randomized to receive a long protocol of leuprorelin + hMG (group DI) or ganirelix + rFSH (group DII). Their respective recipients were randomized to group RI or group RII, respectively.

RESULTS

The characteristics of the donors were similar in both groups. More cycles were cancelled in group DI than in group DII (28.1% vs. 2.5%; p < 0.05). Compared with donors in group DII, the donors in group DI required a significantly higher dose of gonadotropins (2794 +/- 957 U vs. 1777 +/- 1043 U; p < 0.05) and more days of stimulation (11.7 +/- 2.3 vs. 9.5 +/- 1.5; p < 0.05); they also yielded fewer oocytes (15.0 +/- 6.1 vs. 17.9 +/- 8.6; p < 0.05). There were no differences in the characteristics of the recipients, in the fertilization rate or in the number of embryos transferred. The quality of transferred embryos was better in group RI (8.0 +/- 1.2 vs. 7.5 +/- 1.6; p < 0.05), and this group also achieved a better pregnancy rate per embryo transfer than did group RII (62.3% vs. 48.4%; p < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Treating oocyte donors with leuprorelin + hMG produces among recipients a greater probability of clinical pregnancy per embryo transfer than when donors are treated with ganirelix + rFSH; however, more cycles are cancelled and the former treatment is more unpleasant for donors.