Literature DB >> 11687120

Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonists for assisted conception.

H Al-Inany1, M Aboulghar.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Over the last two decades, a long protocol of Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) to prevent premature LH surges has been the standard treatment for ovarian stimulation in assisted reproduction. In the long protocols (with GnRHa started either in the mid luteal phase or in the early follicular phase of the preceding cycle) gonadotrophin administration is delayed until pituitary desensitization has been achieved, which usually takes 2-3 weeks. Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonists produce immediate suppression of gonadotrophin secretion, hence, they can be given after starting gonadotrophin administration. This will result in dramatic reduction in the duration of treatment cycle and will avoid estrogen deprivation symptoms associated with GnRH agonist induced down-regulation. Assuming comparable clinical outcome, these benefits would justify a change from the standard long protocol of GnRH agonists to the new GnRH antagonist regimens.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists with the standard long protocol of GnRH agonists for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in assisted conception. SEARCH STRATEGY: Search strategies included on-line searching of the MEDLINE and EMBASE databases and the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group's Specialised Register from 1982 to 2001, and hand searching of bibliographies of relevant publications and reviews, and abstracts of scientific meetings. SELECTION CRITERIA: Only randomised controlled studies comparing different protocols of GnRH antagonists with GnRH agonists in assisted conception cycles were included in this review. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Data were extracted into 2 x 2 tables. For the primary outcomes, clinical pregnancy per woman randomised and prevention of premature LH surge, the overall common odds ratio (OR) and the risk difference with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated after verifying the presence of homogeneity of treatment effect across all trials. Secondary outcomes considered were the number of oocytes retrieved, clinical pregnancy per oocyte retrieval and per embryo transfer, spontaneous abortion, incidence of severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome and the amount of gonadotrophins used. Where relevant data were missing or unclear the authors were consulted. MAIN
RESULTS: Five trials comparing the new fixed protocol of GnRH antagonist to the long protocol of GnRH agonist fulfilled the inclusion criteria and were included. In four studies, the multiple low-dose (0.25 mg) antagonist regimen was applied and in one study, the single high-dose (3 mg) antagonist regimen was investigated. In all trials, reference treatment included a long protocol of GnRHa (buserelin, leuprorelin or triptorelin) starting in the mid-luteal phase of the preceding cycle. In comparison to the long protocol of GnRHa, the overall OR for the prevention of premature LH surges was 1.76 (95% CI 0.75, 4.16), which is not statistically significant. There was a significantly fewer clinical pregnancies in those treated with GnRH antagonists (OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.62, 0.97). The absolute treatment effect (ATE) was calculated to be 5%. The number needed to treat (NNT) was 20. There was a statistically significant reduction in incidence of severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome, (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.16, 0.80) using antagonist regimens as compared to the long GnRHa protocol. REVIEWER'S
CONCLUSIONS: The new fixed GnRH antagonist protocol (i.e. with antagonist start fixed on day 6 of gonadotrophin stimulation) is a short and simple protocol with a significant reduction in incidence of severe OHSS but a lower pregnancy rate compared to the GnRH agonist long protocol. There is a non significant difference between both protocols regarding prevention of premature LH surge. The clinical outcome may be further improved by developing more flexible antagonist regimens taking into account individual patient characteristics. The GnRH antagonist flexible regimen should be the area of research in the near future.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2001        PMID: 11687120     DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD001750

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev        ISSN: 1361-6137


  10 in total

1.  GnRH antagonists may affect endometrial receptivity.

Authors:  Beth W Rackow; Harvey J Kliman; Hugh S Taylor
Journal:  Fertil Steril       Date:  2008-04-14       Impact factor: 7.329

2.  Luteal phase estradiol versus luteal phase GnRH antagonist administration: their effects on antral follicular size coordination and basal hormonal levels.

Authors:  Batool Rashidi; Roya Nasiri; Haleh Rahmanpour; Ensieh Shahrokh Tehraninejad; Maryam Deldar
Journal:  Iran J Reprod Med       Date:  2011

Review 3.  Scheduling cycles with gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol in in vitro fertilization: Is there a scope in batch in vitro fertilization?

Authors:  Rohit Gutgutia; Sameer Rao; Juan Garcia-Velasco; Susmita Basu
Journal:  J Hum Reprod Sci       Date:  2014 Oct-Dec

4.  What should be the protocol selection after failure of in-vitro fertilization at normoresponder patients: Agonist or antagonist?

Authors:  Seyit Temel Ceyhan; Yeşim Bayoğlu Tekin; Mehmet Sakinci; Cihangir Mutlu Ercan; Uğur Keskin
Journal:  Turk J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2014-12-15

5.  Optimizing estradiol level for gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonist initiation among patients with simple tubal factor infertility.

Authors:  Yizhuo Wang; Xiuhua Xu; Ai-Min Yang; Jie Zhang; Zhuo-Ye Luo; Yan Han; Na Cui; Qian Li; Baojun Shi; Zhi-Ming Zhao; Gui-Min Hao
Journal:  Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)       Date:  2022-09-09       Impact factor: 6.055

Review 6.  Optimal usage of the GnRH antagonists: a review of the literature.

Authors:  Alan B Copperman; Claudio Benadiva
Journal:  Reprod Biol Endocrinol       Date:  2013-03-15       Impact factor: 5.211

7.  Early-cleavage is a reliable predictor for embryo implantation in the GnRH agonist protocols but not in the GnRH antagonist protocols.

Authors:  Wen-Jui Yang; Yuh-Ming Hwu; Robert Kuo-kuang Lee; Sheng-Hsiang Li; Steven Fleming
Journal:  Reprod Biol Endocrinol       Date:  2009-03-03       Impact factor: 5.211

8.  Cessation of gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist on triggering day in flexible multiple-dose protocol: A randomized controlled study.

Authors:  Hye Jin Chang; Jung Ryeol Lee; Byung Chul Jee; Chang Suk Suh; Won Don Lee; Seok Hyun Kim
Journal:  Clin Exp Reprod Med       Date:  2013-06-30

9.  Comparisons of GnRH antagonist versus GnRH agonist protocol in supposed normal ovarian responders undergoing IVF: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Jin-song Xiao; Cun-mei Su; Xian-tao Zeng
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2014-09-12       Impact factor: 3.240

10.  Optimising Follicular Development, Pituitary Suppression, Triggering and Luteal Phase Support During Assisted Reproductive Technology: A Delphi Consensus.

Authors:  Raoul Orvieto; Christos A Venetis; Human M Fatemi; Thomas D'Hooghe; Robert Fischer; Yulia Koloda; Marcos Horton; Michael Grynberg; Salvatore Longobardi; Sandro C Esteves; Sesh K Sunkara; Yuan Li; Carlo Alviggi
Journal:  Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)       Date:  2021-05-10       Impact factor: 5.555

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.