Cargando…
Comparison of a ‘freeze-all’ strategy including GnRH agonist trigger versus a ‘fresh transfer’ strategy including hCG trigger in assisted reproductive technology (ART): a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial
INTRODUCTION: Pregnancy rates after frozen embryo transfer (FET) have improved in recent years and are now approaching or even exceeding those obtained after fresh embryo transfer. This is partly due to improved laboratory techniques, but may also be caused by a more physiological hormonal and endom...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BMJ Publishing Group
2017
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5642760/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28760794 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016106 |
_version_ | 1783271422068523008 |
---|---|
author | Stormlund, Sacha Løssl, Kristine Zedeler, Anne Bogstad, Jeanette Prætorius, Lisbeth Nielsen, Henriette Svarre Bungum, Mona Skouby, Sven O. Mikkelsen, Anne Lis Andersen, Anders Nyboe Bergh, Christina Humaidan, Peter Pinborg, Anja |
author_facet | Stormlund, Sacha Løssl, Kristine Zedeler, Anne Bogstad, Jeanette Prætorius, Lisbeth Nielsen, Henriette Svarre Bungum, Mona Skouby, Sven O. Mikkelsen, Anne Lis Andersen, Anders Nyboe Bergh, Christina Humaidan, Peter Pinborg, Anja |
author_sort | Stormlund, Sacha |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: Pregnancy rates after frozen embryo transfer (FET) have improved in recent years and are now approaching or even exceeding those obtained after fresh embryo transfer. This is partly due to improved laboratory techniques, but may also be caused by a more physiological hormonal and endometrial environment in FET cycles. Furthermore, the risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome is practically eliminated in segmentation cycles followed by FET and the use of natural cycles in FETs may be beneficial for the postimplantational conditions of fetal development. However, a freeze-all strategy is not yet implemented as standard care due to limitations of large randomised trials showing a benefit of such a strategy. Thus, there is a need to test the concept against standard care in a randomised controlled design. This study aims to compare ongoing pregnancy and live birth rates between a freeze-all strategy with gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist triggering versus human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) trigger and fresh embryo transfer in a multicentre randomised controlled trial. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Multicentre randomised, controlled, double-blinded trial of women undergoing assisted reproductive technology treatment including 424 normo-ovulatory women aged 18–39 years from Denmark and Sweden. Participants will be randomised (1:1) to either (1) GnRH agonist trigger and single vitrified-warmed blastocyst transfer in a subsequent hCG triggered natural menstrual cycle or (2) hCG trigger and single blastocyst transfer in the fresh (stimulated) cycle. The primary endpoint is to compare ongoing pregnancy rates per randomised patient in the two treatment groups after the first single blastocyst transfer. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study will be performed in accordance with the ethical principles in the Helsinki Declaration. The study is approved by the Scientific Ethical Committees in Denmark and Sweden. The results of the study will be publically disseminated. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02746562; Pre-results. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5642760 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2017 |
publisher | BMJ Publishing Group |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-56427602017-10-25 Comparison of a ‘freeze-all’ strategy including GnRH agonist trigger versus a ‘fresh transfer’ strategy including hCG trigger in assisted reproductive technology (ART): a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial Stormlund, Sacha Løssl, Kristine Zedeler, Anne Bogstad, Jeanette Prætorius, Lisbeth Nielsen, Henriette Svarre Bungum, Mona Skouby, Sven O. Mikkelsen, Anne Lis Andersen, Anders Nyboe Bergh, Christina Humaidan, Peter Pinborg, Anja BMJ Open Reproductive Medicine INTRODUCTION: Pregnancy rates after frozen embryo transfer (FET) have improved in recent years and are now approaching or even exceeding those obtained after fresh embryo transfer. This is partly due to improved laboratory techniques, but may also be caused by a more physiological hormonal and endometrial environment in FET cycles. Furthermore, the risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome is practically eliminated in segmentation cycles followed by FET and the use of natural cycles in FETs may be beneficial for the postimplantational conditions of fetal development. However, a freeze-all strategy is not yet implemented as standard care due to limitations of large randomised trials showing a benefit of such a strategy. Thus, there is a need to test the concept against standard care in a randomised controlled design. This study aims to compare ongoing pregnancy and live birth rates between a freeze-all strategy with gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist triggering versus human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) trigger and fresh embryo transfer in a multicentre randomised controlled trial. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: Multicentre randomised, controlled, double-blinded trial of women undergoing assisted reproductive technology treatment including 424 normo-ovulatory women aged 18–39 years from Denmark and Sweden. Participants will be randomised (1:1) to either (1) GnRH agonist trigger and single vitrified-warmed blastocyst transfer in a subsequent hCG triggered natural menstrual cycle or (2) hCG trigger and single blastocyst transfer in the fresh (stimulated) cycle. The primary endpoint is to compare ongoing pregnancy rates per randomised patient in the two treatment groups after the first single blastocyst transfer. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study will be performed in accordance with the ethical principles in the Helsinki Declaration. The study is approved by the Scientific Ethical Committees in Denmark and Sweden. The results of the study will be publically disseminated. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02746562; Pre-results. BMJ Publishing Group 2017-07-31 /pmc/articles/PMC5642760/ /pubmed/28760794 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016106 Text en © Article author(s) (or their employer(s) unless otherwise stated in the text of the article) 2017. All rights reserved. No commercial use is permitted unless otherwise expressly granted. This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ |
spellingShingle | Reproductive Medicine Stormlund, Sacha Løssl, Kristine Zedeler, Anne Bogstad, Jeanette Prætorius, Lisbeth Nielsen, Henriette Svarre Bungum, Mona Skouby, Sven O. Mikkelsen, Anne Lis Andersen, Anders Nyboe Bergh, Christina Humaidan, Peter Pinborg, Anja Comparison of a ‘freeze-all’ strategy including GnRH agonist trigger versus a ‘fresh transfer’ strategy including hCG trigger in assisted reproductive technology (ART): a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial |
title | Comparison of a ‘freeze-all’ strategy including GnRH agonist trigger versus a ‘fresh transfer’ strategy including hCG trigger in assisted reproductive technology (ART): a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial |
title_full | Comparison of a ‘freeze-all’ strategy including GnRH agonist trigger versus a ‘fresh transfer’ strategy including hCG trigger in assisted reproductive technology (ART): a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial |
title_fullStr | Comparison of a ‘freeze-all’ strategy including GnRH agonist trigger versus a ‘fresh transfer’ strategy including hCG trigger in assisted reproductive technology (ART): a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of a ‘freeze-all’ strategy including GnRH agonist trigger versus a ‘fresh transfer’ strategy including hCG trigger in assisted reproductive technology (ART): a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial |
title_short | Comparison of a ‘freeze-all’ strategy including GnRH agonist trigger versus a ‘fresh transfer’ strategy including hCG trigger in assisted reproductive technology (ART): a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial |
title_sort | comparison of a ‘freeze-all’ strategy including gnrh agonist trigger versus a ‘fresh transfer’ strategy including hcg trigger in assisted reproductive technology (art): a study protocol for a randomised controlled trial |
topic | Reproductive Medicine |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5642760/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28760794 http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016106 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT stormlundsacha comparisonofafreezeallstrategyincludinggnrhagonisttriggerversusafreshtransferstrategyincludinghcgtriggerinassistedreproductivetechnologyartastudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT løsslkristine comparisonofafreezeallstrategyincludinggnrhagonisttriggerversusafreshtransferstrategyincludinghcgtriggerinassistedreproductivetechnologyartastudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT zedeleranne comparisonofafreezeallstrategyincludinggnrhagonisttriggerversusafreshtransferstrategyincludinghcgtriggerinassistedreproductivetechnologyartastudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT bogstadjeanette comparisonofafreezeallstrategyincludinggnrhagonisttriggerversusafreshtransferstrategyincludinghcgtriggerinassistedreproductivetechnologyartastudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT prætoriuslisbeth comparisonofafreezeallstrategyincludinggnrhagonisttriggerversusafreshtransferstrategyincludinghcgtriggerinassistedreproductivetechnologyartastudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT nielsenhenriettesvarre comparisonofafreezeallstrategyincludinggnrhagonisttriggerversusafreshtransferstrategyincludinghcgtriggerinassistedreproductivetechnologyartastudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT bungummona comparisonofafreezeallstrategyincludinggnrhagonisttriggerversusafreshtransferstrategyincludinghcgtriggerinassistedreproductivetechnologyartastudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT skoubysveno comparisonofafreezeallstrategyincludinggnrhagonisttriggerversusafreshtransferstrategyincludinghcgtriggerinassistedreproductivetechnologyartastudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT mikkelsenannelis comparisonofafreezeallstrategyincludinggnrhagonisttriggerversusafreshtransferstrategyincludinghcgtriggerinassistedreproductivetechnologyartastudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT andersenandersnyboe comparisonofafreezeallstrategyincludinggnrhagonisttriggerversusafreshtransferstrategyincludinghcgtriggerinassistedreproductivetechnologyartastudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT berghchristina comparisonofafreezeallstrategyincludinggnrhagonisttriggerversusafreshtransferstrategyincludinghcgtriggerinassistedreproductivetechnologyartastudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT humaidanpeter comparisonofafreezeallstrategyincludinggnrhagonisttriggerversusafreshtransferstrategyincludinghcgtriggerinassistedreproductivetechnologyartastudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial AT pinborganja comparisonofafreezeallstrategyincludinggnrhagonisttriggerversusafreshtransferstrategyincludinghcgtriggerinassistedreproductivetechnologyartastudyprotocolforarandomisedcontrolledtrial |