A prospective randomized pilot study comparing the short protocol with gonadotropin and gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist to the combination of gonadotropin and gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist for ovulation stimulation in poor responder patients undergoing in vitro fertilization treatments
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20260534Keywords:
Cetrorelix, GnRH agonist, GnRH antagonist, IVF, Poor respondersAbstract
Background: This study aimed to evaluate the effect of gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist for ovulation stimulation in poor responder patients undergoing in vitro fertilization treatments.
Methods: Patients who had previously undergone two IVF cycles and had collected fewer than 5 oocytes in their last attempt, with a baseline FSH value below 15 IU/L, were selected to be included to the study. The patients were randomly included to one of the treatment groups. Before treatment, patients used oral contraceptive pills for 21 days. In Group A, recombinant gonadotropin was used with GnRH agonist in a short protocol. In Group B, recombinant gonadotropin was used with GnRH antagonist cetrorelix.
Results: A total of 24 patients were included in the study. In Group A (11 patients), recombinant gonadotropin was used with GnRH agonist in a short protocol. In Group B (13 patients), recombinant gonadotropin was used with GnRH antagonist cetrorelix. The characteristics of the previous cycles for patients were also similar in both groups. Statistically, it was observed that the estradiol values in Group A were higher during ovulation induction. No significant difference was observed in the amount of gonadotropin used and stimulation durations in both groups. No significant difference was found in the number of oocytes collected. One pregnancy occurred in Group A, while 2 pregnancies occurred in Group B. A positive correlation was found between the baseline FSH value and the amount of gonadotropin used in Group B.
Conclusions: There was no statistically significant difference in term of oocytes, embryo and pregnancy in the two groups. Larger-scale studies are needed to obtain definitive results.
References
Sharma V, Riddle A, Mason BA, Pampiglione J, Campbell S. An analysis of factors influencing the establishment of a clinical pregnancy in an ultrasound-based ambulatory in vitro fertilization program. Fertil Steril. 1988;49(3):468-78. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(16)59775-1
Jones HW Jr, Acosta A, Andrews MC, Garcia JE, Jones GS, Mantzavinos T, et al. The importance of follicular phase to success and failure in in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 1983;40(3):317-21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(16)47293-6
Scott RT, Hofmann GE. Prognostic assessment of ovarian reserve. Fertil Steril. 1995;63(1):1-11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(16)57287-2
Ferraretti AP, La Marca A, Fauser BC, Tarlatzis B, Nargund G, Gianaroli L. ESHRE working group on Poor Ovarian Response Definition. ESHRE consensus on the definition of 'poor response' to ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: the Bologna criteria. Hum Reprod. 2011;26(7):1616-24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/der092
Younis JS, Ben-Ami M, Ben-Shlomo I. The Bologna criteria for poor ovarian response: a contemporary critical appraisal. J Ovarian Res. 2015;8(1):76. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13048-015-0204-9
Poseidon Group (Patient-Oriented Strategies Encompassing IndividualizeD Oocyte Number); Alviggi C, Andersen CY, Buehler K, Conforti A,De Placido G, Esteves SC, et al. A new more detailed stratification of low responders to ovarian stimulation: from a poor ovarian response to a low prognosis concept. Fertil Steril. 2016;105(6):1452-3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.02.005
Drakopoulos P, Bardhi E, Boudry L, Vaiarelli A, Makrigiannakis A, Esteves SC, et al. Update on the management of poor ovarian response in IVF: the shift from Bologna criteria to the Poseidon concept. Ther Adv Reprod Health. 2020;14:1-11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1177/2633494120941480
Reissmann T, Schally AV, Bouchard P, Riethmiiller H, Engel J. The LHRH antagonist Cetrorelix: a revieuw. Hum Reprod Update. 2000;6(4):322-31. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/6.4.322
Ovarian Stimulation TEGGO, Bosch E, Broer S, Griesinger G, Grynberg M, Humaidan P, Kolibianakis E, et al. ESHRE guideline: ovarian stimulation for IVF/ICSI. Hum Reprod Open. 2020;2020(2):hoaa009. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/hropen/hoaa009
Albano C, Felberbaum RE, Smitz J, Riethmüller-Winzen H, Engel J, Diedrich K, et al. Ovarian stimulation with HMG: results of a prospective randomized phase III European study comparing the luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH)-antagonist cetrorelix and the LHRH-agonist buserelin. Hum Reprod. 2000;15(3):526-31. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/15.3.526
Olivennes F, Belaisch-Allart J, Emperaire JC, Dechaud H, Alvarez S, Moreau L, et al. Prospective randomized, controlled study in in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer with a single dose of a LHRH antagonist (cetrorelix) or a depot formula of an LHRH agonist (Triptorelin). Fertile Steril. 2000;73(2):314-20. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(99)00524-5
Xiao J, Chang S, Chen S. The effectiveness of gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist in poor ovarian responders undergoing in vitro fertilization: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2013;100(6):1594-601. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.08.024
Sunkara SK, Coomarasamy A, Faris R, Braude P, Khalaf Y. Long gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist versus short agonist versus antagonist regimens in poor responders undergoing in vitro fertilization: a randomized controlled trial. Fertil Steril. 2014;101(1):147-53. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.09.035
Olivennes F, Diedrich K, Frydman R, Felberbaum RE, Howles CM. Safety and efficacy of a 3 mg dose of the GnRH antagonist cetrorelix in preventing premature LH surges: report of two large multicentre, multinational, phase IIIb clinical experiences. Reproductive BioMedicine Online. 2003;6(4):432-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1472-6483(10)62163-3
Al Hussaini TK, Mohamed AA, Askar A, Abden AA, Othman YM, Hussein RS. Ovarian stimulation in patient oriented strategies encompassing individualised oocyte number 4 category; Antagonist versus short agonist protocols. J Hum Reprod Sci. 2023;16(3):212-7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.4103/jhrs.jhrs_72_23
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
