Cargando…

Comparing ART outcomes in women with endometriosis after GnRH agonist versus GnRH antagonist ovarian stimulation: a systematic review

BACKGROUND: Endometriosis is an oestrogen-dependent disease that can cause subfertility in women who may require assisted reproductive technology (ART) to achieve their pregnancy goals. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare ART outcomes in women with endometriosis following the long GnRH-...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kuan, Kevin K.W., Omoseni, Sean, Tello, Javier A.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: SAGE Publications 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10331103/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37435528
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/20420188231173325
_version_ 1785070192372482048
author Kuan, Kevin K.W.
Omoseni, Sean
Tello, Javier A.
author_facet Kuan, Kevin K.W.
Omoseni, Sean
Tello, Javier A.
author_sort Kuan, Kevin K.W.
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Endometriosis is an oestrogen-dependent disease that can cause subfertility in women who may require assisted reproductive technology (ART) to achieve their pregnancy goals. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare ART outcomes in women with endometriosis following the long GnRH-agonist controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) protocol with those taking the GnRH-antagonist COS protocol. DATA SOURCES AND METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science were systematically searched in June 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing the long GnRH-agonist COS protocol and the GnRH-antagonist COS protocol in women with all stages/subtypes of endometriosis were included. Data were synthesized into comprehensive tables for systematic review. The Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) checklists were used for the risk of bias assessment of non-randomized studies and randomized studies, and all the included studies were deemed to have acceptable quality. MAIN RESULTS: Eight studies (one RCT and seven observational) with 2695 patients (2761 cycles) were included. Most studies generally reported non-significant differences in clinical pregnancy or live birth rates regardless of the COS protocol used. However, the GnRH-agonist protocol may yield a higher total number of oocytes retrieved, especially mature oocytes. Conversely, the GnRH-antagonist protocol required a shorter COS duration and lower gonadotrophin dose. Adverse outcomes, such as rates of cycle cancellation and miscarriage, were similar between both COS protocols. CONCLUSION: Both the long GnRH-agonist and GnRH-antagonist COS protocols generally yield similar pregnancy outcomes. However, the long GnRH-agonist protocol may be associated with a higher cumulative pregnancy rate due to the higher number of retrieved oocytes available for cryopreservation. The underlying mechanisms of the two COS protocols on the female reproductive tract remain unclear. Clinicians should consider treatment costs, stage/subtype of endometriosis and pregnancy goals of their patients when selecting a GnRH analogue for COS. A well-powered RCT is needed to minimize the risk of bias and compare the risk for ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. REGISTRATION: This review was prospectively registered at PROSPERO under Registration No. CRD42022327604.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10331103
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2023
publisher SAGE Publications
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-103311032023-07-11 Comparing ART outcomes in women with endometriosis after GnRH agonist versus GnRH antagonist ovarian stimulation: a systematic review Kuan, Kevin K.W. Omoseni, Sean Tello, Javier A. Ther Adv Endocrinol Metab Systematic Review BACKGROUND: Endometriosis is an oestrogen-dependent disease that can cause subfertility in women who may require assisted reproductive technology (ART) to achieve their pregnancy goals. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare ART outcomes in women with endometriosis following the long GnRH-agonist controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) protocol with those taking the GnRH-antagonist COS protocol. DATA SOURCES AND METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science were systematically searched in June 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing the long GnRH-agonist COS protocol and the GnRH-antagonist COS protocol in women with all stages/subtypes of endometriosis were included. Data were synthesized into comprehensive tables for systematic review. The Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) checklists were used for the risk of bias assessment of non-randomized studies and randomized studies, and all the included studies were deemed to have acceptable quality. MAIN RESULTS: Eight studies (one RCT and seven observational) with 2695 patients (2761 cycles) were included. Most studies generally reported non-significant differences in clinical pregnancy or live birth rates regardless of the COS protocol used. However, the GnRH-agonist protocol may yield a higher total number of oocytes retrieved, especially mature oocytes. Conversely, the GnRH-antagonist protocol required a shorter COS duration and lower gonadotrophin dose. Adverse outcomes, such as rates of cycle cancellation and miscarriage, were similar between both COS protocols. CONCLUSION: Both the long GnRH-agonist and GnRH-antagonist COS protocols generally yield similar pregnancy outcomes. However, the long GnRH-agonist protocol may be associated with a higher cumulative pregnancy rate due to the higher number of retrieved oocytes available for cryopreservation. The underlying mechanisms of the two COS protocols on the female reproductive tract remain unclear. Clinicians should consider treatment costs, stage/subtype of endometriosis and pregnancy goals of their patients when selecting a GnRH analogue for COS. A well-powered RCT is needed to minimize the risk of bias and compare the risk for ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. REGISTRATION: This review was prospectively registered at PROSPERO under Registration No. CRD42022327604. SAGE Publications 2023-07-04 /pmc/articles/PMC10331103/ /pubmed/37435528 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/20420188231173325 Text en © The Author(s), 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) which permits any use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage).
spellingShingle Systematic Review
Kuan, Kevin K.W.
Omoseni, Sean
Tello, Javier A.
Comparing ART outcomes in women with endometriosis after GnRH agonist versus GnRH antagonist ovarian stimulation: a systematic review
title Comparing ART outcomes in women with endometriosis after GnRH agonist versus GnRH antagonist ovarian stimulation: a systematic review
title_full Comparing ART outcomes in women with endometriosis after GnRH agonist versus GnRH antagonist ovarian stimulation: a systematic review
title_fullStr Comparing ART outcomes in women with endometriosis after GnRH agonist versus GnRH antagonist ovarian stimulation: a systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Comparing ART outcomes in women with endometriosis after GnRH agonist versus GnRH antagonist ovarian stimulation: a systematic review
title_short Comparing ART outcomes in women with endometriosis after GnRH agonist versus GnRH antagonist ovarian stimulation: a systematic review
title_sort comparing art outcomes in women with endometriosis after gnrh agonist versus gnrh antagonist ovarian stimulation: a systematic review
topic Systematic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10331103/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37435528
http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/20420188231173325
work_keys_str_mv AT kuankevinkw comparingartoutcomesinwomenwithendometriosisaftergnrhagonistversusgnrhantagonistovarianstimulationasystematicreview
AT omosenisean comparingartoutcomesinwomenwithendometriosisaftergnrhagonistversusgnrhantagonistovarianstimulationasystematicreview
AT tellojaviera comparingartoutcomesinwomenwithendometriosisaftergnrhagonistversusgnrhantagonistovarianstimulationasystematicreview