GnRH-agonist ovulation trigger in patients undergoing controlled ovarian hyperstimulation for IVF with ultrashort flare GnRH-agonist combined with multidose GnRH-antagonist protocol

Prediction, assessment, and management of suboptimal GnRH agonist trigger: a systematic review

PURPOSE

This systematic review aimed to identify baseline patient demographic and controlled ovarian stimulation characteristics associated with a suboptimal response to GnRHa triggering, and available options for prevention and management of suboptimal response.

METHODS

PubMed, Google Scholar, Medline, and the Cochrane Library were searched for keywords related to GnRHa triggering, and peer-reviewed articles from January 2000 to September 2021 included.

RESULTS

Thirty-seven studies were included in the review. A suboptimal response to GnRHa triggering was more likely following long-term or recent oral contraceptive use and with a low or high body mass index. Low basal serum follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), luteinizing hormone (LH), and estradiol serum levels were correlated with suboptimal oocyte yield, as was a low serum LH level on the day of triggering. A prolonged stimulation period and increased gonadotropin requirements were correlated with suboptimal response to triggering. Post-trigger LH < 15 IU/L best correlated with an increased risk for empty follicle syndrome and a lower oocyte retrieval rate. Retriggering with hCG may be considered in patients with suboptimal response according to post-trigger LH, as in cases of failed aspiration.

CONCLUSION

Pre-treatment assessment of patient characteristics, with pre- and post-triggering assessment of clinical and endocrine cycle characteristics, may identify cases at risk for suboptimal response to GnRHa triggering and optimize its utilization.

A simplified universal approach to COH protocol for IVF: ultrashort flare GnRH-agonist/GnRH-antagonist protocol with tailored mode and timing of final follicular maturation

Recently, several new promising modifications have been introduced to clinical practice that may simplify and optimize IVF outcome. In the present opinion paper we present a simplified approach to controlled ovarian hyperstimulation protocol (COH), which combines the benefits of the ultrashort flare GnRH agonist/GnRH antagonist protocol and the personalized tailored mode and timing of ovulation triggering, aiming to improve IVF outcome while eliminating of severe OHSS.In patients at risk to develop severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS), GnRH agonist (GnRHa) trigger if offered for final follicular maturation. While in those achieving ≥20 oocytes, the freeze all policy with the subsequent frozen-thawed embryo transfers (ET) is recommended, in those where less than 20 oocytes are retrieved, patients are re-evaluated 3 days after oocyte retrieval (day of ET) for signs of early moderate OHSS. If no early signs of OHSS developed, one embryo was transferred, and the patients are instructed to inject 1500 IU of HCG. In cases where signs of early moderate OHSS appear, the freeze all policy is recommended.In Patients not at risk to develop severe OHSS- three different modes of concomitant administration of both GnRHa and a standard bolus of hCG (5000-10,000 units) prior to oocyte retrieval were suggested. Standard hCG dose concomitant with GnRHa (dual trigger), 35-37 h before oocyte retrieval is offered to normal responders patients, resulting in improved oocyte/embryo quality and IVF outcome. GnRHa 40 h and standard hCG added 34 h prior to oocyte retrieval (double trigger), respectively are offered to patients demonstrating abnormal final follicular maturation despite normal response to COH. The double trigger results in significantly higher number of oocytes retrieved, higher proportions of the number of oocytes retrieved to the number of follicles >10 mm and >14 mm in diameter on day of hCG administration, higher number of MII oocytes and proportion of MII oocytes per number of oocytes retrieved, with the consequent significantly increased number of top-quality embryos, as compared to the hCG-only trigger cycles. Standard hCG dose concomitant with GnRHa (dual trigger), 34 h before oocyte retrieval should be offered to poor responders patients, aiming to overcome premature luteinization, while achieving high yield of mature oocytes.Further studies are required to support this new concept prior to its implementation as a universal COH protocol to IVF practice.

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist versus HCG for oocyte triggering in antagonist-assisted reproductive technology

BACKGROUND

Human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG) is routinely used for final oocyte maturation triggering in in vitro fertilisation (IVF)/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles, but the use of HCG for this purpose may have drawbacks. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists present an alternative to HCG in controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) treatment regimens in which the cycle has been down-regulated with a GnRH antagonist. This is an update of a review first published in 2010.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of GnRH agonists in comparison with HCG for triggering final oocyte maturation in IVF and ICSI for women undergoing COH in a GnRH antagonist protocol.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched databases including the Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group (MDSG) Specialised Register of Controlled Trials, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) and trial registers for published and unpublished articles (in any language) on randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists versus HCG for oocyte triggering in GnRH antagonist IVF/ICSI treatment cycles. The search is current to 8 September 2014.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs that compared the clinical outcomes of GnRH agonist triggers versus HCG for final oocyte maturation triggering in women undergoing GnRH antagonist IVF/ICSI treatment cycles were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two or more review authors independently selected studies, extracted data and assessed study risk of bias. Treatment effects were summarised using a fixed-effect model, and subgroup analyses were conducted to explore potential sources of heterogeneity. Treatment effects were expressed as mean differences (MDs) for continuous outcomes and as odds ratios (ORs) for dichotomous outcomes, together with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Primary outcomes were live birth and rate of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) per women randomised. Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methods were used to assess the quality of the evidence for each comparison.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 17 RCTs (n = 1847), of which 13 studies assessed fresh autologous cycles and four studies assessed donor-recipient cycles. In fresh autologous cycles, GnRH agonists were associated with a lower live birth rate than was seen with HCG (OR 0.47, 95% CI 0.31 to 0.70; five RCTs, 532 women, I(2) = 56%, moderate-quality evidence). This suggests that for a woman with a 31% chance of achieving live birth with the use of HCG, the chance of a live birth with the use of an GnRH agonist would be between 12% and 24%.In women undergoing fresh autologous cycles, GnRH agonists were associated with a lower incidence of mild, moderate or severe OHSS than was HCG (OR 0.15, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.47; eight RCTs, 989 women, I² = 42%, moderate-quality evidence). This suggests that for a woman with a 5% risk of mild, moderate or severe OHSS with the use of HCG, the risk of OHSS with the use of a GnRH agonist would be between nil and 2%.In women undergoing fresh autologous cycles, GnRH agonists were associated with a lower ongoing pregnancy rate than was seen with HCG (OR 0.70, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.91; 11 studies, 1198 women, I(2) = 59%, low-quality evidence) and a higher early miscarriage rate (OR 1.74, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.75; 11 RCTs, 1198 women, I² = 1%, moderate-quality evidence). However, the effect was dependent on the type of luteal phase support provided (with or without luteinising hormone (LH) activity); the higher rate of pregnancies in the HCG group applied only to the group that received luteal phase support without LH activity (OR 0.36, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.62; I(2) = 73%, five RCTs, 370 women). No evidence was found of a difference between groups in risk of multiple pregnancy (OR 3.00, 95% CI 0.30 to 30.47; two RCTs, 62 women, I(2) = 0%, low-quality evidence).In women with donor-recipient cycles, no evidence suggested a difference between groups in live birth rate (OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.61; one RCT, 212 women) or ongoing pregnancy rate (OR 0.88, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.32; three RCTs, 372 women, I² = 0%). We found evidence of a lower incidence of OHSS in the GnRH agonist group than in the HCG group (OR 0.05, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.28; three RCTs, 374 women, I² = 0%).The main limitation in the quality of the evidence was risk of bias associated with poor reporting of methods in the included studies.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Final oocyte maturation triggering with GnRH agonist instead of HCG in fresh autologous GnRH antagonist IVF/ICSI treatment cycles prevents OHSS to the detriment of the live birth rate. In donor-recipient cycles, use of GnRH agonists instead of HCG resulted in a lower incidence of OHSS, with no evidence of a difference in live birth rate.Evidence suggests that GnRH agonist as a final oocyte maturation trigger in fresh autologous cycles is associated with a lower live birth rate, a lower ongoing pregnancy rate (pregnancy beyond 12 weeks) and a higher rate of early miscarriage (less than 12 weeks). GnRH agonist as an oocyte maturation trigger could be useful for women who choose to avoid fresh transfers (for whatever reason), women who donate oocytes to recipients or women who wish to freeze their eggs for later use in the context of fertility preservation.