GnRH Agonist Trigger and LH ActivityLuteal Phase Support versus hCG Trigger and Conventional Luteal Phase Support in Fresh embryo Transfer IvF/ICSI Cycles-A Systematic PRISMA Review and Meta-analysis

被引:48
|
作者
Haahr, Thor [1 ,2 ]
Roque, Matheus [3 ]
Esteves, Sandro C. [2 ,4 ,5 ]
Humaidan, Peter [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Skive Reg Hosp, Fertil Clin, Skive, Denmark
[2] Aarhus Univ, Fac Hlth, Aarhus C, Denmark
[3] ORIGEN Ctr Reprod Med, Rio De Janeiro, Brazil
[4] ANDROFERT, Androl & Human Reprod Clin, Sao Paulo, Brazil
[5] Univ Estadual Campinas, UNICAMP, Dept Surg, Sao Paulo, Brazil
来源
关键词
in vitro fertilization; intracytoplasmic sperm injection; ovarian stimulation; ovulation induction; gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist trigger; luteal phase support; live birth rate; ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome; OVARIAN HYPERSTIMULATION SYNDROME; IN-VITRO FERTILIZATION; HIGH-RISK PATIENTS; OOCYTE MATURATION; EXOGENOUS PROGESTERONE; HORMONE AGONIST; CHILDREN BORN; IVF TREATMENT; DOSE HCG; ANTAGONIST;
D O I
10.3389/fendo.2017.00116
中图分类号
R5 [内科学];
学科分类号
1002 ; 100201 ;
摘要
Introduction: The use of GnRH agonist (GnRHa) for final oocyte maturation trigger in oocyte donation and elective frozen embryo transfer cycles is well established due to lower ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) rates as compared to hCG trigger. A recent Cochrane meta-analysis concluded that GnRHa trigger was associated with reduced live birth rates (LBRs) in fresh autologous IVF cycles compared to hCG trigger. However, the evidence is not unequivocal, and recent trials have found encouraging reproductive outcomes among couples undergoing GnRHa trigger and individualized luteal LH activity support. Thus, the aim was to compare GnRHa trigger followed by luteal LH activity support with hCG trigger in IVF patients undergoing fresh embryo transfer. Material and methods: We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials published until December 14, 2016. The population was infertile patients submitted to IVF/ICSI cycles with GnRH antagonist cotreatment who underwent fresh embryo transfer. The intervention was GnRHa trigger followed by LH activity luteal phase support (LPS). The comparator was hCG trigger followed by a standard LPS. The critical outcome measures were LBR and OHSS rate. The secondary outcome measures were number of oocytes retrieved, clinical and ongoing pregnancy rates, and miscarriage rates. Results: A total of five studies met the selection criteria comprising a total of 859 patients. The LBR was not significantly different between the GnRHa and hCG trigger groups (OR 0.84, 95% Cl 0.62, 1.14). OHSS was reported in a total of 4/413 cases in the GnRHa group compared to 7/413 in the hCG group (OR 0.48, 95% Cl 0.15, 1.60). We observed a slight, but non-significant increase in miscarriage rate in the GnRHa triggered group compared to the hCG group (OR 1.85; 95% Cl 0.97, 3.54). Conclusion: GnRHa trigger with LH activity LPS resulted in comparable LBRs compared to hCG trigger. The most recent trials reported LBRs close to unity indicating that individualization of the LH activity LPS improved the luteal phase deficiency reported in the first GnRHa trigger studies. However, LPS optimization is needed to further limit OHSS in the subgroup of normoresponder patients (<14 follicles >= 11 mm).
引用
收藏
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [41] Clinical pregnancy following GnRH agonist administration in the luteal phase of fresh or frozen assisted reproductive technology (ART) cycles: Systematic review and meta-analysis
    Chau, Le Thi Minh
    Tu, Duong Khue
    Lehert, Philippe
    Dung, Do Van
    Thanh, Le Quang
    Tuan, Vo Minh
    EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY AND REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY, 2019, 3
  • [42] STARTING TIME OF PROGESTERONE LUTEAL PHASE SUPPORT IN IVF: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW AND META-ANALYSIS.
    Connell, M. T.
    Szatkowski, J. M.
    Terry, N.
    DeCherney, A. H.
    Propst, A. M.
    Hill, M. J.
    FERTILITY AND STERILITY, 2014, 102 (03) : E237 - E237
  • [43] Luteal phase supplementation after gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist trigger in fresh embryo transfer: the American versus European approaches
    Humaidan, Peter
    Engmann, Lawrence
    Benadiva, Claudio
    FERTILITY AND STERILITY, 2015, 103 (04) : 879 - 885
  • [44] Fresh embryo transfer versus frozen embryo transfer in in vitro fertilization cycles: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Roque, Matheus
    Lattes, Karinna
    Serra, Sandra
    Sola, Ivan
    Geber, Selmo
    Carreras, Ramon
    Angel Checa, Miguel
    FERTILITY AND STERILITY, 2013, 99 (01) : 156 - 162
  • [45] Effect of luteal phase support with vaginal progesterone on pregnancy outcomes in natural frozen embryo transfer cycles: A meta-analysis
    Seol, Aeran
    Shim, Yoo Jin
    Kim, Sung Woo
    Kim, Seul Ki
    Lee, Jung Ryeol
    Jee, Byung Chul
    Suh, Chang Suk
    Kim, Seok Hyun
    CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL REPRODUCTIVE MEDICINE-CERM, 2020, 47 (02): : 147 - 152
  • [46] Progesterone Serum Level on HCG Trigger Day among Frozen Embryo Transfer IVF Patients and Pregnancy Outcomes: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    Herida, Alifia Ramadhani
    Soelaeman, Muhamad Faza
    BALI MEDICAL JOURNAL, 2023, 12 (03) : 2548 - 2554
  • [47] Obstetric and neonatal outcomes after natural versus artificial cycle frozen embryo transfer and the role of luteal phase support: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Zaat, T. R.
    Kostova, E. B.
    Korsen, P.
    Showell, M. G.
    Mol, F.
    van Wely, M.
    HUMAN REPRODUCTION UPDATE, 2023, 29 (05) : 634 - 654
  • [48] Immediate versus postponed frozen embryo transfer after IVF/ICSI: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Bergenheim, Sara J.
    Saupstad, Marte
    Pistoljevic, Nina
    Andersen, Anders Nyboe
    Forman, Julie Lyng
    Lossl, Kristine
    Pinborg, Anja
    HUMAN REPRODUCTION UPDATE, 2021, 27 (04) : 623 - 642
  • [49] GnRH agonist for final oocyte maturation in GnRH antagonist co-treated IVF/ICSI treatment cycles: Systematic review and meta-analysis
    Youssef, M. A. F.
    Abdelmoty, Hatem I.
    Ahmed, Mohamed A. S.
    Elmohamady, Maged
    JOURNAL OF ADVANCED RESEARCH, 2015, 6 (03) : 341 - 349
  • [50] Oral dydrogesterone vs. micronized vaginal progesterone as luteal phase support in IVF: a systematic review and meta-analysis
    Griesinger, G.
    Tournaye, H.
    HUMAN REPRODUCTION, 2017, 32 : 289 - 290