Literature DB >> 31371053

Comparison of a novel flexible progestin primed ovarian stimulation protocol and the flexible gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol for assisted reproductive technology.

Sule Yildiz1, Engin Turkgeldi1, Berk Angun2, Alper Eraslan2, Bulent Urman3, Baris Ata4.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a flexible progestin primed ovarian stimulation (fPPOS) protocol is effective for preventing premature ovulation.
DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study.
SETTING: Private assisted reproduction center. PATIENT(S): Eighty-seven oocyte donors and 191 recipients of fresh oocytes. INTERVENTION(S): Each donor was stimulated with a flexible gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol in one cycle and with the new fPPOS protocol in the other, within a period of 6 months. FSH was started on cycle day 2-3, and 0.25 mg/day GnRH antagonist or 10 mg/day medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) was started on stimulation day 7 or when the leading follicle reached 14 mm, whichever came first. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Duration of stimulation, gonadotropin consumption, duration of GnRH antagonist or MPA administration, number of metaphase II oocytes, and pregnancy rates in fresh oocyte recipients.
RESULTS: Duration of stimulation was 11 (10-11) days in both groups. Total gonadotropin consumption was similar. Pituitary suppression was started on day 7 and lasted for 5 days in each group. There were no premature ovulations in any group. The fPPOS yielded a significantly higher number of cumulus oocyte complexes than GnRH antagonist cycles (33 [21-39] vs. 26 [18-36], respectively). Likewise, the fPPOS generated significantly more metaphase II oocytes than GnRH antagonist cycles (24 [17-34] vs. 21 [15-28], respectively). Recipients of fresh oocytes from fPPOS and GnRH antagonist cycles had similar cleavage, blastulation, implantation, and live birth/ongoing pregnancy rates (50% vs. 48.6%). CONCLUSION(S): FPPOS with MPA seems to be an effective choice for preventing premature ovulation in women undergoing ovarian stimulation without compromising oocyte quality.
Copyright © 2019 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  GnRH antagonist; Progestin primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS); gamete donation; in vitro fertilization; medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA); ovarian stimulation; progesterone

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2019        PMID: 31371053     DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2019.06.009

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Fertil Steril        ISSN: 0015-0282            Impact factor:   7.329


  10 in total

1.  Outcomes of a GnRH Agonist Trigger Following a GnRH Antagonist or Flexible Progestin-Primed Ovarian Stimulation Cycle.

Authors:  Erkan Kalafat; Engin Turkgeldi; Sule Yıldız; Merve Dizdar; Ipek Keles; Baris Ata
Journal:  Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)       Date:  2022-05-19       Impact factor: 6.055

2.  Medroxyprogesterone acetate used in ovarian stimulation is associated with reduced mature oocyte retrieval and blastocyst development: a matched cohort study of 825 freeze-all IVF cycles.

Authors:  Kemal Ozgur; Murat Berkkanoglu; Hasan Bulut; Levent Donmez; Kevin Coetzee
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2020-07-22       Impact factor: 3.412

3.  Impact of progestin ovarian stimulation on newborn outcomes: a meta-analysis.

Authors:  Irene Zolfaroli; Gemma Arribas Ferriol; Juan-José Hidalgo Mora; Antonio Cano
Journal:  J Assist Reprod Genet       Date:  2020-03-25       Impact factor: 3.412

4.  Late Follicular Phase Ovarian Stimulation Without Exogenous Pituitary Modulators.

Authors:  Xiuxian Zhu; Jing Ye; Yonglun Fu
Journal:  Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)       Date:  2020-08-13       Impact factor: 5.555

5.  Effectiveness of progesterone-primed ovarian stimulation in assisted reproductive technology: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Fang Wang; Chen Chen; Ling Cui; Yonghong Lin
Journal:  Arch Gynecol Obstet       Date:  2021-01-12       Impact factor: 2.344

6.  Usefulness of random-start progestin-primed ovarian stimulation for fertility preservation.

Authors:  Haipeng Huang; Yukiko Itaya; Kouki Samejima; Shunichiro Ichinose; Tatsuya Narita; Shigetaka Matsunaga; Masahiro Saitoh; Yasushi Takai
Journal:  J Ovarian Res       Date:  2022-01-04       Impact factor: 4.234

7.  The Comparison of Fixed and Flexible Progestin Primed Ovarian Stimulation on Mature Oocyte Yield in Women at Risk of Premature Ovarian Insufficiency.

Authors:  Erkan Kalafat; Merve Dizdar; Engin Turkgeldi; Sule Yildiz; Ipek Keles; Baris Ata
Journal:  Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)       Date:  2022-02-03       Impact factor: 5.555

8.  Comparison of the Cumulative Live Birth Rates of Progestin-Primed Ovarian Stimulation and Flexible GnRH Antagonist Protocols in Patients With Low Prognosis.

Authors:  Mingze Du; Junwei Zhang; Zhen Li; Xinmi Liu; Jing Li; Wenxia Liu; Yichun Guan
Journal:  Front Endocrinol (Lausanne)       Date:  2021-09-13       Impact factor: 5.555

9.  Progesterone affects clinic oocyte yields by coordinating with follicle stimulating hormone via PI3K/AKT and MAPK pathways.

Authors:  Hui Long; Weina Yu; Sha Yu; Mingru Yin; Ling Wu; Qiuju Chen; Renfei Cai; Lun Suo; Li Wang; Qifeng Lyu; Yanping Kuang
Journal:  J Adv Res       Date:  2021-03-02       Impact factor: 10.479

10.  The efficacy of dydrogesterone use to suppress premature luteinizing hormone surge on cycle outcomes in controlled ovarian stimulation

Authors:  Gülşen Doğan Durdağ; Gizem Bektaş; Esengül Türkyılmaz; Halime Göktepe; Meltem Sönmezer; Yavuz Emre Şükür; Batuhan Özmen; Cem Atabekoğlu; Bülent Berker; Ruşen Aytaç; Murat Sönmezer
Journal:  J Turk Ger Gynecol Assoc       Date:  2021-01-04
  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.