Dataset Information

Hormone Replacement Versus Natural Cycle Protocols of Endometrial Preparation for Frozen Embryo Transfer.

ABSTRACT: Research question:Endometrial preparation is one of the most important steps for ensuring frozen embryo transfer success. However, there is no clear evidence that identifies an optimal endometrial preparation protocol for frozen embryo transfer. In addition, in studies that assessed which were the optimal endometrial preparation protocols, few analyzed the stage and the number of embryos. This study compared the pregnancy outcomes and perinatal obstetric complications of patients who were transferred two cleavage-stage (day 2 or day 3) frozen embryos with the natural cycle and those with the hormone replacement therapy cycle. Design:This study was a secondary analysis of data from a multicentre randomized controlled trial designed to compare the pregnancy and perinatal outcomes after frozen versus fresh embryo transfer. In this study, a total of 908 patients who were transferred two cleavage-stage (day 2 or day 3) embryos in the original trial were analyzed. Pregnancy outcomes and perinatal obstetric complications after the natural cycle and the hormone replacement therapy cycle were compared. Result:We found the endometrium in the natural group was significantly thicker than the hormone replacement therapy cycle group (p<0.01). The implantation rate (42.6% vs 37.3% p=0.049) showed a significant difference between the natural cycle group and the hormone replacement therapy cycle group. Compared to the natural cycle group, the hormone replacement therapy cycle group was associated with an increased risk of caesarean section (72.3% vs 84.5, p=0.009). Conclusion:The natural cycle protocol yielded thicker endometria, a higher implantation rate and a lower risk of caesarean section than the hormone replacement therapy protocol in the transfer of two cleavage-stage frozen embryos. The natural cycle protocol was the better endometrial preparation protocol for frozen embryo transfer.

SUBMITTER: Pan Y

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7555052 | biostudies-literature | 2020

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Hormone Replacement Versus Natural Cycle Protocols of Endometrial Preparation for Frozen Embryo Transfer.

Pan Ye Y Li Bo B Wang Ze Z Wang Ying Y Gong Xiaoshu X Zhou Wenqing W Shi Yuhua Y

Frontiers in endocrinology 20200930

<h4>Research question</h4>Endometrial preparation is one of the most important steps for ensuring frozen embryo transfer success. However, there is no clear evidence that identifies an optimal endometrial preparation protocol for frozen embryo transfer. In addition, in studies that assessed which were the optimal endometrial preparation protocols, few analyzed the stage and the number of embryos. This study compared the pregnancy outcomes and perinatal obstetric complications of patients who wer ...[more]

PMID: 33101194

Similar Datasets

Project description:The optimal protocol for endometrial preparation in patients with infertility remains unclear. Due to this, the current study retrospectively analyzed 1,589 patients with infertility and regular menstrual cycles to assess reproductive outcomes per embryo transferred and per embryo transfer (ET) cycle following the transfer of frozen-thawed embryos (FET) in a modified natural cycle (mNC) or hormone therapy cycle (HT) with or without gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa)-induced pituitary suppression. The molecular mechanisms involved were also studied using tissues from endometrial biopsies. Patients who underwent FET were assigned to 5 groups as follows: Group A underwent a mNC (n=276); group B (n=338) received estradiol (E2) and progesterone (P4); group C received 1 cycle of GnRHa, E2 and P4 (n=323); group D received 2 cycles of GnRHa, E2 and P4 (n=329); and group E received 3 cycles of GnRHa, E2 and P4 (n=323). Tissues from endometrial biopsies of 91 patients performed on the day of ET were tested for endometrial receptivity marker mRNA expression and microRNA (miR)-223-3p mRNA. Furthermore, endometrial stromal cells (ESCs) were used for an in-depth study of the molecular mechanisms involved. Among the 5 groups of patients, implantation rates, clinical pregnancy rates and live birth rates were not significantly different. However, endometrial receptivity was enhanced in group E when compared with groups A-D, which was associated with endometrial leukemia inhibitory factor (LIF), osteopontin, vascular endothelial growth factor, integrin β3 and homeobox gene 10 and 11 mRNA upregulation, and miR-223-3p miRNA downregulation. Transfection of ESCs with an miR-223-3p mimic significantly reduced levels of LIF mRNA and protein. In addition, pre-treating ESCs with GnRHa upregulated mRNA and protein expression of the decidualization markers prolactin and insulin-like growth factor binding protein-1 in a time-dependent manner. In conclusion, these results indicated that HT with GnRHa may be a potential endometrial preparation protocol for FET.

Project description:BackgroundThe current routine endometrial preparation protocol for women with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is hormone replacement treatment (HRT). Letrozole is rarely used in frozen embryo cycles. Evidence confirming whether letrozole-stimulated (LS) protocol is suitable for frozen embryo transfer in patients with PCOS and for whom is suitable remains lacking.MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort study involving all frozen embryo transfer cycles with LS and HRT for PCOS during the period from Jan 2019 to December 2020 at a tertiary care center. Multivariate Logistic regression was used to analyze the differences in clinical pregnancy rate, live birth rate, miscarriage rate, the incidence of other pregnancy and obstetric outcomes between LS and HRT protocols after adjusting for possible confounding factors. Subgroup analysis was used to explore the population for which LS protocol was suitable.ResultsThe results of multivariate logistic regression showed that LS was significantly associated with a higher clinical pregnancy rate (70.9% vs. 64.4%;aOR:1.41, 95%CI: 1.18,1.68), live birth rate (60.5% vs. 51.4% aOR:1.49, 95%CI: 1.27,1.76), and a lower risk of miscarriage (14.7% vs. 20.1% aOR: 0.68, 95%CI: 0.53,0.89), hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (6.7% vs. 8.9% aOR: 0.63, 95%CI: 0.42,0.95), and gestational diabetes mellitus (16.7% vs. 20.7% aOR:0.71, 95%CI: 0.53,0.93) than HRT. There were no significant differences in other outcomes such as preterm birth, cesarean delivery, small for gestational age, or large for gestational age between the two endometrial preparation protocols. Subgroup analysis showed that LS had higher live birth rates than HRT in most of the subgroups; in the three subgroups of maternal age ≥ 35 years, menstrual cycle < 35 days, and no insulin resistance, the live birth rates of the two endometrial preparation protocols were comparable.ConclusionsLS protocol could improve the live birth rate and reduce the incidence of miscarriage, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy and gestational diabetes mellitus in patients with PCOS. LS protocol is suitable for all types of patients with PCOS. LS should be considered the preferred endometrial preparation protocol for women with PCOS.

Project description:BackgroundA number of studies have compared the clinical outcomes between the two endometrial preparation methods: natural cycles (NCs) and hormone replacement treatment (HRT) before frozen embryo transfer, but the results were conflicting. In order to mitigate the potential effect of embryos per se, several researchers have worked on this subject for euploid blastocyst transfer, but the results were still inconsistent. Therefore, the present study was aimed to investigate the clinical outcomes between HRT and NC for autologous single vitrified-warmed euploid blastocyst transfer based on our data.MethodsA total of 598 frozen-thawed single euploid blastocyst transfer cycles in the assisted reproductive center of Northwest Women's and Children's Hospital from January 2014 to May 2021 were retrospectively analyzed. Women were stratified into the NC (n = 125) or HRT (n = 473) group according to the patient's preference and the physician's guidance. Multivariate regression models and subgroup analysis were constructed to analyze the association between endometrial preparation and live birth.ResultsWomen in the NC group had a higher live birth rate (68.80% versus 58.35%, P = 0.034) and a lower risk of total pregnancy loss (8.51% versus 21.14%, P = 0.005) when compared with women in the HRT group. The biochemical pregnancy rate (75.20% versus 74.00%, P = 0.784) and clinical pregnancy rate (74.40% versus 69.98%, P = 0.334) were similar between the two groups (NC versus HRT). NC was associated with an increased odds of live birth compared with HRT by different multivariable analysis models (Model 1: adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.57, 0.36 - 0.90; Model 2: aOR, 95%CI: 0.57, 0.35 - 0.92). In addition, the increased chance of live birth in the NC group was found in all subgroups. No major obstetrical complications and two malformation livebirths were reported.ConclusionsIn women undergoing single euploid frozen blastocyst transfers, the NC group was associated with a lower pregnancy loss rate and an ultimately higher live birth rate than the HRT group. Although HRT is convenient for both clinicians and patients, the lower live birth rate should be taken into account and NC might be the first choice of endometrial preparation method.

Dataset Information

Hormone Replacement Versus Natural Cycle Protocols of Endometrial Preparation for Frozen Embryo Transfer.

Publications

Hormone Replacement Versus Natural Cycle Protocols of Endometrial Preparation for Frozen Embryo Transfer.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets