| Literature DB >> 30405094 |
Jingjing Jiang1, Shanshan Gao1, Jin Xu1.
Abstract
BACKGROUND The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of 2 GnRH agonists - triptorelin acetate and cetrorelix acetate - in assisted reproduction. MATERIAL AND METHODS A total of 182 females who received in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF+ET) from March 2014 to July 2014 were involved, and their clinical data were retrospectively analyzed. Among them, 91 patients received treatment with short-acting triptorelin (group A) and another 91 patients were treated with cetrorelix acetate (group B). Fasting blood was extracted from each patient on the day of administration of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG), and serum levels of luteinizing hormone (LH), estradiol (E2), and progesterone (P) were detected using chemiluminescence method. The number of oocytes, fertilization rate, cleavage rate, and number of obtained embryos were recorded and compared. Pregnancy outcomes and adverse events were observed and compared. Expression level of FSH receptor (FSHR) in endometrial tissues was measured by qRT-PCR. RESULTS Serum level of E2 was significantly lower in group B than in group A (p<0.05). Indices, including the number of oocytes, fertilization rate and cleavage rate, number of obtained embryos, and pregnancy rate, were slightly better in group B than in group A, but no significant differences were found. The incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) was significant higher in group A than in group B (p<0.05). FSHR expression level was significantly lower in group B than in group A. CONCLUSIONS The effect of cetrorelix acetate is superior to that of short-acting triptorelin in assisted reproduction. Our most important finding is that cetrorelix acetate reduced the incidence of OHSS.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2018 PMID: 30405094 PMCID: PMC6237043 DOI: 10.12659/MSM.911345
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Med Sci Monit ISSN: 1234-1010
Comparison of general information.
| Groups | Cases | Age (y) | Serum FSH (U/L) | Serum LH (U/L) | FSH/LH |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 91 | 26–39 (29.09±4.48) | 6.48±1.19 | 5.38±3.73 | 1.2±1.03 |
| B | 91 | 29–37 (30.56±4.18) | 6.43±1.38 | 5.33±2.72 | 1.21±0.98 |
Comparison of the levels of hormones between 2 groups on the day of the injection of hCG.
| Groups | Cases | LH (U/L) | E2 (pg/ml) | P (ng/ml) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 91 | 2.12±1.07 | 4041.33±2240.23 | 0.91±0.34 |
| B | 91 | 2.33±0.88 | 3181.81±1720.34 | 1.06±0.28 |
Compared with group A, p<0.05.
Comparison of pregnancy outcomes between 2 groups.
| Groups | Cases | Number of oocytes | Fertilization rate (%) | Cleavage rate (%) | Number of obtained embryos | Pregnancy rate (%) | Endometrial thickness (mm) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 91 | 13.13±6.23 | 63.00 (751/1192) | 81.36 (611/751) | 4.12±2.13 | 54.95 (50/91) | 1.09±0.20 |
| B | 91 | 14.32±6.64 | 65.33 (863/1321) | 82.86 (551/665) | 4.51±2.72 | 58.24 (53/91) | 1.08±0.24 |
Comparison of incidences of adverse event between 2 groups.
| Groups | Cases | Rash | Erubescence | OHSS | Abortion | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| A | 91 | 1 (1.10) | 1 (1.10) | 4 (3.30) | 2 (2.20) | 8 (8.8%) |
| B | 91 | 1 (2.20) | 2 (1.10) | 0 (0) | 3 (3.30) | 7 (7.7%) |
Compared with group A, p<0.05.
Figure 1Expression level of FSHR in endometrial tissues of the 2 groups before and after treatment. * Compared with group A, p<0.05.