Cargando…

Outcome of cryopreserved-thawed embryo transfer in the GnRH agonist versus antagonist protocol

Background: GnRH agonist and antagonist were developed to control the premature release of LH surge. There is some difference between two protocols. Objective: We compared the outcome of frozen-thawed embryo transfer in infertile women who used GnRH agonist or antagonist protocol for previous COH cy...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Eftekhar, Maryam, Dehghani Firouzabadi, Razieh, Karimi, Hesamoddin, Rahmani, Elham
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Research and Clinical Center for Infertility 2012
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4165945/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25246889
_version_ 1782335169204584448
author Eftekhar, Maryam
Dehghani Firouzabadi, Razieh
Karimi, Hesamoddin
Rahmani, Elham
author_facet Eftekhar, Maryam
Dehghani Firouzabadi, Razieh
Karimi, Hesamoddin
Rahmani, Elham
author_sort Eftekhar, Maryam
collection PubMed
description Background: GnRH agonist and antagonist were developed to control the premature release of LH surge. There is some difference between two protocols. Objective: We compared the outcome of frozen-thawed embryo transfer in infertile women who used GnRH agonist or antagonist protocol for previous COH cycle and evaluation of any adverse effect of GnRH antagonist on oocyte and embryo. Materials and Methods: The study group included all infertile women who referred to Yazd Research and Clinical Center for Infertility. Overall 20-35 years old women who were candidate for frozen-thawed embryo transfer with regard to inclusion and exclusion criteria were participated in the study. The patients based on previous control ovarian stimulation (COH) protocol divided in to two groups: GnRH agonist long protocol (n=165) and GnRH antagonist multiple dose protocol (n=165). Frozen-thawed embryos were transferred after endometrial preparation in both groups. Main outcome measures were: implantation, chemical and clinical pregnancy rate. Results: The implantation and clinical pregnancy rate following cryopreserved embryo transfer in GnRH agonist group and antagonist group were 16.3% vs. 15.7% (p=0.806) and 38.1% (63/165) vs. 36.9% (61/165) (p=0.915) and chemical pregnancy rate was 44.8% (74/165) vs. 43.6% (72/165) (p=0.915) respectively. Conclusion: There was no statistically difference between two groups in terms of implantation and pregnancy rate. Although pregnancy rate in fresh embryo transfer in antagonist cycles was lower than agonist groups, Therefore decrease in these parameters might be due to detrimental effect of GnRH antagonist on the endometrium, not embryo or oocyte.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4165945
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2012
publisher Research and Clinical Center for Infertility
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-41659452014-09-22 Outcome of cryopreserved-thawed embryo transfer in the GnRH agonist versus antagonist protocol Eftekhar, Maryam Dehghani Firouzabadi, Razieh Karimi, Hesamoddin Rahmani, Elham Iran J Reprod Med Original Article Background: GnRH agonist and antagonist were developed to control the premature release of LH surge. There is some difference between two protocols. Objective: We compared the outcome of frozen-thawed embryo transfer in infertile women who used GnRH agonist or antagonist protocol for previous COH cycle and evaluation of any adverse effect of GnRH antagonist on oocyte and embryo. Materials and Methods: The study group included all infertile women who referred to Yazd Research and Clinical Center for Infertility. Overall 20-35 years old women who were candidate for frozen-thawed embryo transfer with regard to inclusion and exclusion criteria were participated in the study. The patients based on previous control ovarian stimulation (COH) protocol divided in to two groups: GnRH agonist long protocol (n=165) and GnRH antagonist multiple dose protocol (n=165). Frozen-thawed embryos were transferred after endometrial preparation in both groups. Main outcome measures were: implantation, chemical and clinical pregnancy rate. Results: The implantation and clinical pregnancy rate following cryopreserved embryo transfer in GnRH agonist group and antagonist group were 16.3% vs. 15.7% (p=0.806) and 38.1% (63/165) vs. 36.9% (61/165) (p=0.915) and chemical pregnancy rate was 44.8% (74/165) vs. 43.6% (72/165) (p=0.915) respectively. Conclusion: There was no statistically difference between two groups in terms of implantation and pregnancy rate. Although pregnancy rate in fresh embryo transfer in antagonist cycles was lower than agonist groups, Therefore decrease in these parameters might be due to detrimental effect of GnRH antagonist on the endometrium, not embryo or oocyte. Research and Clinical Center for Infertility 2012-07 /pmc/articles/PMC4165945/ /pubmed/25246889 Text en This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/) which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
spellingShingle Original Article
Eftekhar, Maryam
Dehghani Firouzabadi, Razieh
Karimi, Hesamoddin
Rahmani, Elham
Outcome of cryopreserved-thawed embryo transfer in the GnRH agonist versus antagonist protocol
title Outcome of cryopreserved-thawed embryo transfer in the GnRH agonist versus antagonist protocol
title_full Outcome of cryopreserved-thawed embryo transfer in the GnRH agonist versus antagonist protocol
title_fullStr Outcome of cryopreserved-thawed embryo transfer in the GnRH agonist versus antagonist protocol
title_full_unstemmed Outcome of cryopreserved-thawed embryo transfer in the GnRH agonist versus antagonist protocol
title_short Outcome of cryopreserved-thawed embryo transfer in the GnRH agonist versus antagonist protocol
title_sort outcome of cryopreserved-thawed embryo transfer in the gnrh agonist versus antagonist protocol
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4165945/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25246889
work_keys_str_mv AT eftekharmaryam outcomeofcryopreservedthawedembryotransferinthegnrhagonistversusantagonistprotocol
AT dehghanifirouzabadirazieh outcomeofcryopreservedthawedembryotransferinthegnrhagonistversusantagonistprotocol
AT karimihesamoddin outcomeofcryopreservedthawedembryotransferinthegnrhagonistversusantagonistprotocol
AT rahmanielham outcomeofcryopreservedthawedembryotransferinthegnrhagonistversusantagonistprotocol