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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: 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
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