Cargando…

Comparison of clinical effects between early follicular prolonged GnRH agonist protocol and GnRH antagonist protocol in 3310 cycles: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND: It is the duty of doctors to choose a safe, simple, economic and effective controlled ovulation stimulation (COS) protocol for the patients. This study aims to compare the clinical effects of the early follicular prolonged GnRH agonist (EFPL) and GnRH antagonist (GnRH-Ant) protocols, hop...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Gui, Juan, Ni, Yuan, Liu, Qian, Wang, Xiaochen, Xie, Qingzhen
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: BioMed Central 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9756476/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36522703
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-022-05295-6
_version_ 1784851637369569280
author Gui, Juan
Ni, Yuan
Liu, Qian
Wang, Xiaochen
Xie, Qingzhen
author_facet Gui, Juan
Ni, Yuan
Liu, Qian
Wang, Xiaochen
Xie, Qingzhen
author_sort Gui, Juan
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: It is the duty of doctors to choose a safe, simple, economic and effective controlled ovulation stimulation (COS) protocol for the patients. This study aims to compare the clinical effects of the early follicular prolonged GnRH agonist (EFPL) and GnRH antagonist (GnRH-Ant) protocols, hoping to provide some reference for clinicians when choosing COS program. METHODS: A retrospective study included 3310 ovum pick up cycles undergoing assisted reproductive technology during January 2019 to May 2022 in Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University. Propensity Score Matching (PSM) and multivariable logistic regression analysis were used to improve the comparability between the two protocols. Subgroups were divided according to age, body mass index (BMI) and anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH). The live birth rate (LBR) and clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) were the primary outcomes. RESULTS: After PSM, the endometrial thickness, fresh embryo transplantation rate, chemical pregnancy rate, CPR were significantly higher in EFPL group than that in GnRH-Ant group (P < 0.001). The E2, LH, P values on trigger day were significantly lower in EFPL group (P < 0.001). The cycle cancellation rate was significantly reduced in EFPL group (P < 0.001). However, the total amount of Gn and duration of Gn were significantly increased in the EFPL group (P < 0.001). Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that the LBR was significantly higher in EFPL group after matching [OR (95%CI), 1.86 (1.13, 3.05), P = 0.02], especially for those with age < 35 years [OR (95%CI), 1.95 (1.14, 3.34), P = 0.02], BMI < 24 kg/m(2) [OR (95%CI), 2.08 (1.14, 3.80), P = 0.02], AMH levels ≥ 4.5 ng/ml [OR (95%CI), 4.19 (1.53, 11.43), P < 0.01]. CONCLUSION: EFPL regimen is more suitable to elicit live birth for those young patients with BMI < 24 kg/m(2) and AMH ≥ 4.5 ng/ml. However, for patients with decreased ovarian reserve or advanced age, EFPL regimen has no advantage over the GnRH-Ant regimen.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-9756476
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher BioMed Central
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-97564762022-12-17 Comparison of clinical effects between early follicular prolonged GnRH agonist protocol and GnRH antagonist protocol in 3310 cycles: a retrospective study Gui, Juan Ni, Yuan Liu, Qian Wang, Xiaochen Xie, Qingzhen BMC Pregnancy Childbirth Research BACKGROUND: It is the duty of doctors to choose a safe, simple, economic and effective controlled ovulation stimulation (COS) protocol for the patients. This study aims to compare the clinical effects of the early follicular prolonged GnRH agonist (EFPL) and GnRH antagonist (GnRH-Ant) protocols, hoping to provide some reference for clinicians when choosing COS program. METHODS: A retrospective study included 3310 ovum pick up cycles undergoing assisted reproductive technology during January 2019 to May 2022 in Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University. Propensity Score Matching (PSM) and multivariable logistic regression analysis were used to improve the comparability between the two protocols. Subgroups were divided according to age, body mass index (BMI) and anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH). The live birth rate (LBR) and clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) were the primary outcomes. RESULTS: After PSM, the endometrial thickness, fresh embryo transplantation rate, chemical pregnancy rate, CPR were significantly higher in EFPL group than that in GnRH-Ant group (P < 0.001). The E2, LH, P values on trigger day were significantly lower in EFPL group (P < 0.001). The cycle cancellation rate was significantly reduced in EFPL group (P < 0.001). However, the total amount of Gn and duration of Gn were significantly increased in the EFPL group (P < 0.001). Multivariable logistic regression analysis showed that the LBR was significantly higher in EFPL group after matching [OR (95%CI), 1.86 (1.13, 3.05), P = 0.02], especially for those with age < 35 years [OR (95%CI), 1.95 (1.14, 3.34), P = 0.02], BMI < 24 kg/m(2) [OR (95%CI), 2.08 (1.14, 3.80), P = 0.02], AMH levels ≥ 4.5 ng/ml [OR (95%CI), 4.19 (1.53, 11.43), P < 0.01]. CONCLUSION: EFPL regimen is more suitable to elicit live birth for those young patients with BMI < 24 kg/m(2) and AMH ≥ 4.5 ng/ml. However, for patients with decreased ovarian reserve or advanced age, EFPL regimen has no advantage over the GnRH-Ant regimen. BioMed Central 2022-12-15 /pmc/articles/PMC9756476/ /pubmed/36522703 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-022-05295-6 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.
spellingShingle Research
Gui, Juan
Ni, Yuan
Liu, Qian
Wang, Xiaochen
Xie, Qingzhen
Comparison of clinical effects between early follicular prolonged GnRH agonist protocol and GnRH antagonist protocol in 3310 cycles: a retrospective study
title Comparison of clinical effects between early follicular prolonged GnRH agonist protocol and GnRH antagonist protocol in 3310 cycles: a retrospective study
title_full Comparison of clinical effects between early follicular prolonged GnRH agonist protocol and GnRH antagonist protocol in 3310 cycles: a retrospective study
title_fullStr Comparison of clinical effects between early follicular prolonged GnRH agonist protocol and GnRH antagonist protocol in 3310 cycles: a retrospective study
title_full_unstemmed Comparison of clinical effects between early follicular prolonged GnRH agonist protocol and GnRH antagonist protocol in 3310 cycles: a retrospective study
title_short Comparison of clinical effects between early follicular prolonged GnRH agonist protocol and GnRH antagonist protocol in 3310 cycles: a retrospective study
title_sort comparison of clinical effects between early follicular prolonged gnrh agonist protocol and gnrh antagonist protocol in 3310 cycles: a retrospective study
topic Research
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9756476/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36522703
http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-022-05295-6
work_keys_str_mv AT guijuan comparisonofclinicaleffectsbetweenearlyfollicularprolongedgnrhagonistprotocolandgnrhantagonistprotocolin3310cyclesaretrospectivestudy
AT niyuan comparisonofclinicaleffectsbetweenearlyfollicularprolongedgnrhagonistprotocolandgnrhantagonistprotocolin3310cyclesaretrospectivestudy
AT liuqian comparisonofclinicaleffectsbetweenearlyfollicularprolongedgnrhagonistprotocolandgnrhantagonistprotocolin3310cyclesaretrospectivestudy
AT wangxiaochen comparisonofclinicaleffectsbetweenearlyfollicularprolongedgnrhagonistprotocolandgnrhantagonistprotocolin3310cyclesaretrospectivestudy
AT xieqingzhen comparisonofclinicaleffectsbetweenearlyfollicularprolongedgnrhagonistprotocolandgnrhantagonistprotocolin3310cyclesaretrospectivestudy