Dataset Information

GnRH agonist and hCG (dual trigger) versus hCG trigger for follicular maturation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Traditionally, final follicular maturation is triggered by a single bolus of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG). This acts as a surrogate to the naturally occurring luteinizing hormone (LH) surge to induce luteinization of the granulosa cells, resumption of meiosis and final oocyte maturation. More recently, a bolus of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist in combination with hCG (dual trigger) has been suggested as an alternative regimen to achieve final follicular maturation.

Methods

This study was a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials evaluating the effect of dual trigger versus hCG trigger for follicular maturation on pregnancy outcomes in women undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF). The primary outcome was the live birth rate (LBR) per started cycle.

Results

A total of 1048 participants were included in the analysis, with 519 in the dual trigger group and 529 in the hCG trigger group. Dual trigger treatment was associated with a significantly higher LBR per started cycle compared with the hCG trigger treatment (risk ratio (RR) = 1.37 [1.07, 1.76], I² = 0%, moderate evidence). There was a trend towards an increase in both ongoing pregnancy rate (RR = 1.34 [0.96, 1.89], I² = 0%, low evidence) and implantation rate (RR = 1.31 [0.90, 1.91], I² = 76%, low evidence) with dual trigger treatment compared with hCG trigger treatment. Dual trigger treatment was associated with a significant increase in clinical pregnancy rate (RR = 1.29 [1.10, 1.52], I² = 13%, low evidence), number of oocytes collected (mean difference (MD) = 1.52 [0.59, 2.46), I² = 53%, low evidence), number of mature oocytes collected (MD = 1.01 [0.43, 1.58], I² = 18%, low evidence), number of fertilized oocytes (MD = 0.73 [0.16, 1.30], I² = 7%, low evidence) and significantly more usable embryos (MD = 0.90 [0.42, 1.38], I² = 0%, low evidence).

Conclusion

Dual trigger treatment with GnRH agonist and HCG is associated with an increased live birth rate compared with conventional hCG trigger.

Trial registration

CRD42020204452 .

SUBMITTER: Hu KL

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8167939 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionThe use of GnRH agonist (GnRHa) for final oocyte maturation trigger in oocyte donation and elective frozen embryo transfer cycles is well established due to lower ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) rates as compared to hCG trigger. A recent Cochrane meta-analysis concluded that GnRHa trigger was associated with reduced live birth rates (LBRs) in fresh autologous IVF cycles compared to hCG trigger. However, the evidence is not unequivocal, and recent trials have found encouraging reproductive outcomes among couples undergoing GnRHa trigger and individualized luteal LH activity support. Thus, the aim was to compare GnRHa trigger followed by luteal LH activity support with hCG trigger in IVF patients undergoing fresh embryo transfer.Material and methodsWe conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials published until December 14, 2016. The population was infertile patients submitted to IVF/ICSI cycles with GnRH antagonist cotreatment who underwent fresh embryo transfer. The intervention was GnRHa trigger followed by LH activity luteal phase support (LPS). The comparator was hCG trigger followed by a standard LPS. The critical outcome measures were LBR and OHSS rate. The secondary outcome measures were number of oocytes retrieved, clinical and ongoing pregnancy rates, and miscarriage rates.ResultsA total of five studies met the selection criteria comprising a total of 859 patients. The LBR was not significantly different between the GnRHa and hCG trigger groups (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.62, 1.14). OHSS was reported in a total of 4/413 cases in the GnRHa group compared to 7/413 in the hCG group (OR 0.48, 95% CI 0.15, 1.60). We observed a slight, but non-significant increase in miscarriage rate in the GnRHa triggered group compared to the hCG group (OR 1.85; 95% CI 0.97, 3.54).ConclusionGnRHa trigger with LH activity LPS resulted in comparable LBRs compared to hCG trigger. The most recent trials reported LBRs close to unity indicating that individualization of the LH activity LPS improved the luteal phase deficiency reported in the first GnRHa trigger studies. However, LPS optimization is needed to further limit OHSS in the subgroup of normoresponder patients (<14 follicles???11?mm).Prospero registration numberCRD42016051091.

Project description:IntroductionPregnancy 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 analysisMulticentre 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 disseminationThe 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 numberNCT02746562; Pre-results.

Project description:BackgroundLuteinizing hormone (LH) and progesterone (PROG) on human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) trigger day are significantly correlated with assisted reproductive technology (ART) outcome. Moreover, LH and PROG are also involved in the functional preparation of the endometrium during the implantation window; however, whether they are related to endometrial thickness (EMT) is still unknown. The aim of the present study was to assess whether EMT has a positive correlation on the live birth rate following fresh embryo transfer (ET), and whether LH and PROG have an impact on EMT.MethodsA total of 2,260 normogonadotrophic women were treated with a GnRH agonist for in vitro fertilization (IVF)/intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Patients with advanced age and poor ovarian reserve were excluded. The levels of LH, PROG, and EMT on the hCG trigger day were divided into binary variables, respectively, by the cutoff values, and which were obtained based on receiver operating characteristic curve analysis of live birth among LH, PROG and EMT levels on the hCG trigger day, respectively. Multivariate binary logistic regression was used to confirm the role of LH, PROG, and EMT on the live birth, and stratified analysis was used to determine whether LH and PROG have an impact on EMT.ResultsEMT and LH were protective factors for live births, with odds ratios (OR) of 1.11 [95% confidence interval (CI): 1.066-1.157] and 1.696 (95% CI: 1.345-2.139), respectively. However, PROG was a risk factor for live birth, with an OR of 0.635 (95% CI: 0.526-0.766). The hierarchical cross-table analysis indicated that EMT had no significant difference for live birth in the combination of low LH and high PROG group. In the other subgroups, thick EMT was associated with a higher live birth rate (P<0.05).ConclusionsOn hCG trigger day, EMT, LH, and PROG all were independent factors that affected the live birth of fresh ETs. Thick EMT can significantly increase the live birth rate. However, multivariate logistic regression analysis showed that EMT does not affect the live birth rate in combination of low LH and high PROG environment.

Project description:A suggested explanation for the pituitary-suppressive effects of progestin-primed ovarian stimulation cycles (PPOS) is pituitary luteinizing hormone (LH) depletion with progestin exposure during the follicular phase. The GnRH agonist (GnRHa) trigger releases endogenous LH from the pituitary, and if the LH depletion theory is correct, the response to the agonist trigger would be dampened in PPOS cycles. In this study, we compared the performance of the GnRHa trigger after PPOS and GnRH antagonist ovarian stimulation cycles. All women who underwent ovarian stimulation with the GnRH antagonist or flexible PPOS (fPPOS) and received a GnRH agonist trigger were eligible for inclusion. Outcomes included number of metaphase-II (MII) oocytes retrieved per cycle, rates of empty follicle syndrome, maturation, fertilization, blastulation, and cumulative clinical pregnancy per stimulation cycle. During the screening period, there were 166 antagonists and 58 fPPOS cycles triggered with a GnRH agonist. Groups were matched for potential confounders using propensity score matching. Progestin-downregulated cycles had 19% high mature oocyte yield (median: 14 vs. 19 MII oocytes, P = 0.03). Cumulative ongoing pregnancy or live birth rates were estimated after matching for transferred embryo count, and rates were similar between GnRH antagonist and fPPOS group (57.0% vs. 62.1%, P = 0.68). However, the number of remaining blastocysts was higher in the fPPOS group (median: 5.0 vs. 6.0, P < 0.001). LH levels were higher in fPPOS cycles compared to GnRH antagonist cycles up to the trigger day (P < 0.001). After the GnRHa trigger, fPPOS cycles were associated with a steeper LH surge compared with antagonist cycles (P = 0.02). Higher endogenous gonadotropin levels through the stimulation period and an LH surge of higher magnitude following a GnRHa trigger suggest a milder pituitary suppression by fPPOS, which needs to be confirmed in larger samples. It appears that progestins do not deplete pituitary LH reserves and a GnRHa trigger is usable after PPOS in women with high ovarian reserve.