| Literature DB >> 35945767 |
Yixuan Liu1, Lijuan Ma2,3, Min Zhu1, Huirong Yin1, Hongli Yan1, Minfeng Shi1.
Abstract
The well-prepared endometrium with appropriate thickness plays a critical role in successful embryo implantation. The thin endometrium is the main factor of frozen-embryo transfer (FET), resulting in the failure of implantation undergoing FET. Hormone treatment is suggested to improve endometrium thickness; however, among the larger numbers of cases, it cannot reach the sufficient thickness, which leads to a high cancelation rate of embryo transfer as well as waste high-quality embryos. Thus, it increases the burden to patients in both economic and psychological perspectives. We performed a retrospective observational study, which was composed with 2 cohorts, either with the conventional hormone replacement therapy (HRT) protocol or HRT with gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) pretreatment to prepare the endometrium before FET. The measurements of endometrium thickness, hormone level, transfer cycle cancelation rate, pregnancy rate, and implantation rate were retrieved from the medical records during the routine clinic visits until 1 month after embryo transfer. The comparisons between 2 cohorts were performed by t-test or Mann-Whitney U test depending on the different attributions of data. In total, 49 cycles were under HRT with GnRHa pretreatment and 84 cycles were under the conventional HRT protocol. HRT with GnRHa pretreatment group improved the endometrial thickness (8.13 ± 1.79 vs 7.51 ± 1.45, P = .031), decreased the transfer cancelation rate (P = .003), and increased clinical pregnancy rate and implantation rate significantly (both P = .001). Additionally, luteinizing hormone level in pretreatment group was consistently lower than conventional HRT group (P < .05). Our study revealed HRT with GnRHa pretreatment efficiently improved the endometrial thickness, therefore, decreased the FET cycle cancelation. It also elevated the embryo implantation rate and clinical pregnancy rate by improving endometrial receptivity.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35945767 PMCID: PMC9351881 DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000029928
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Medicine (Baltimore) ISSN: 0025-7974 Impact factor: 1.817
Figure 1.HRT protocols for endometrial preparation. It was usually started in menstrual bleeding day 3, which was presented as HRT D1 in HRT conventional protocol. *HRT D1 is on the 14th day after the second GnRHa injection. **HRT DX means any possible day between HRT D11 and D18. b.i.d. = 2-times per day, D = day, E2 = estrogen, orally administrated, FET = frozen-embryo transfer, HRT = hormone replacement therapy, IM = intramuscular, MC = menstrual cycle, P4 = progesterone, pv = per vagina.
Figure 2.The measurements of endometrial thickness by transvaginal ultrasound. The uterus was in sagittal plane. The distance between 2 crosses as the thickest portion near the fundus was the endometrial thickness.
Comparison of basic characteristics.
| GnRHa Pretreatment HRT (n = 49) | Conventional HRT (n = 84) | Statistical test |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Female age (yr) | 34.20 ± 5.37 | 34.46 ± 5.89 | .800 | |
| Male age (yr) | 36.31 ± 7.28 | 36.39 ± 7.99 | .950 | |
| BMI (kg/m2) | 22.07 ± 2.81 | 22.84 ± 3.96 | .238 | |
| Duration of infertility (yr) | 4.0 (1.5–6.0) | 3.0 (2.0–5.0) | .291 | |
| Primary infertility rate, n (%) | 13 (26.5) | 36 (42.9) | χ2 = 3.545 | .060 |
| b FSH (U/L) | 6.20 ± 1.68 | 6.53 ± 2.38 | .403 | |
| b LH (U/L) | 4.816 ± 2.47 | 4.490 ± 2.18 | .439 | |
| b E2(pg/mL) | 43.927 ± 28.23 | 37.42 ± 20.14 | .133 | |
| b P (ng/mL) | 0.56 ± 0.24 | 0.52 ± 0.23 | .448 | |
| Endometrial thickness before treatment (mm) | 7.00 (6.25–7.50) | 7.00 (6.03–7.50) | .863 |
Comparison of endometrial preparation outcomes on transformation day.
| GnRHa pretreatment HRT (n = 49) | Conventional HRT (n = 84) | Statistical test |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Estrogen administration duration (d) | 16.0 (15.0–17.0) | 16.0 (14.0–17.0) | .113 | |
| LH (U/L) | 0.86 ± 0.80 | 17.10 ± 11.43 | .000 | |
| E2 (pg/mL) | 402.20 ± 556.83 | 460.88 ± 602.52 | .615 | |
| P (ng/mL) | 0.45 ± 0.27 | 2.29 ± 7.26 | .034 | |
| Endometrial thickness (mm) | 8.13 ± 1.79 | 7.51 ± 1.45 | .031 | |
| ∆Em (mm) | 1.00 (0.15–2.50) | 0.50 (0.00–1.40) | .048 | |
| Transfer cycle cancelation rate | 6 (12.2) | 30 (35.7) | χ2 = 8.635 | .003 |
Comparison of embryo transfer and pregnancy outcomes.
| GnRHa pretreatment HRT (n = 43) | Conventional HRT (n = 54) | Statistical test |
| |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Endometrium thickness on transfer day (mm) | 8.42 ± 1.61 | 8.15 ± 1.26 | .515 | |
| Number of embryos transferred per cycle | 2 (2, 2) | 2 (2, 2) | .826 | |
| LH level on transformation day (U/L) | 0.87 ± 0.84 | 16.864 ± 10.92 | .000 | |
| P level on transformation day (ng/mL) | 0.46 ± 0.27 | 1.52 ± 2.51 | .004 | |
| Blastocyst transfer rate; n (%) | 21 (48.8) | 12 (22.2) | χ2 = 7.554 | .006 |
| Number of transferred top-quality embryo per cycle | 1 (1, 2) | 1 (0, 2) | .306 | |
| Top-quality embryo transfer rate; n (%) | 45 (52.3) | 65 (60.7) | χ2 = 1.380 | .240 |
| Clinical pregnancy rate; n (%) | 23 (53.5) | 12 (22.2) | χ2 = 10.147 | .001 |
| Ectopic pregnancy rate; n (%) | 0 (0.0) | 0 (0.0) | – | – |
| Implantation rate; n (%) | 29 (33.7) | 15 (14.0) | χ2 = 10.516 | .001 |
Logistic regression analysis of factors associated with clinical pregnancy rate.
| Multivariate analysis | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Variable | AdjOR | 95% confidence interval |
|
| HRT protocols Conventional vs GnRHa pretreatment | 0.23 | 0.05–0.95 | .043 |
| Female age (yrs) | 0.93 | 0.85–1.02 | .125 |
| Number of transferred embryos | 1.42 | 0.45–4.44 | .548 |
| LH level on transformation day (U/L) | 1.01 | 0.95–1.07 | .749 |
| Blastocyst transferred, yes vs no | 0.92 | 0.31–2.70 | .872 |
| Endometrium thickness on embryo transfer day (mm) | 1.11 | 0.78–1.56 | .565 |