Cargando…
Progestin-Primed Ovarian Stimulation is a non-inferior alternative to the GnRH Antagonist Protocol in patients undergoing assisted reproductive techniques: a retrospective study
OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate the non-inferiority of Clinical Pregnancy Rates from Progestin-Primed Ovarian Stimulation compared to the GnRH Antagonist Protocol when the freeze-all and blastocyst transfer strategy is applied. METHODS: A retrospective study included all IVF cycles performed at Pró-Criar...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Brazilian Society of Assisted Reproduction
2022
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8769185/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34609115 http://dx.doi.org/10.5935/1518-0557.20210057 |
Sumario: | OBJECTIVE: To demonstrate the non-inferiority of Clinical Pregnancy Rates from Progestin-Primed Ovarian Stimulation compared to the GnRH Antagonist Protocol when the freeze-all and blastocyst transfer strategy is applied. METHODS: A retrospective study included all IVF cycles performed at Pró-Criar Reproductive Medicine Center, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil, between May 2018 and May 2019 using a GnRH antagonist analogue or oral progestins to block the LH peak in IVF/intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles for infertility treatment. RESULTS: The primary outcome of our study was Clinical Pregnancy Rate at the first ET (Blastocyst), which were 58.4% in the progestin group and 54.9% in the antagonist group (p=0.735), a finding consistent with most studies published to date using different progestins. The mean number of retrieved oocytes was 11 in the antagonist group and 9 oocytes in the progestin group (p=0.009). The fertilization rate was 80% for both groups (p=0.935). The rate of blastocyst formation per cycle was 50% in the antagonist group and 55.6% in the progestin group (p=0.106). The stimulation lasted a mean of 10 days in the two groups (p=0.403) and did not vary with patient age in either group. The gonadotropin dose used was higher in the antagonist group (2025 IU) than in the progestin group (1950 IU) (p=0.057). In addition, the blockade was effective: there was only one case of spontaneous ovulation, which corresponded to less than 1% of the cycles. CONCLUSIONS: Progestin-Primed Ovarian Stimulation is a non-inferior alternative to the GnRH Antagonist Protocol in patients undergoing assisted reproductive techniques. An incidence compatible with the 0.34 to 8% risk described in the literature for failure to control the premature LH surge in antagonist protocol cycles. |
---|