Dataset Information

Non-reproductive Effects of Anovulation: Bone Metabolism in the Luteal Phase of Premenopausal Women Differs between Ovulatory and Anovulatory Cycles.

ABSTRACT: Introduction: Several authors have linked subclinical ovulatory disturbances in normal length menstrual cycles to premenopausal fracture risk and bone changes. This study systematically examined the influence of ovulation and anovulation on the bone metabolism of premenopausal women. Participants and Methods: In 176 cycles in healthy premenopausal women, FSH, 17β-estradiol (E2) and progesterone (P4) as well as bone alkalic phosphatase (BAP), pyridinoline (PYD) and C-terminal crosslinks (CTX) were measured during the follicular and during the luteal phase. The probability and timing of ovulation was self-assessed by a monitoring device. In addition, bone density of the lumbar spine was measured by quantitative computed tomography (QCT) at baseline and at the end of the study. Analysis was restricted to blood samples taken more than three days before the following menstruation. Results: 118 cycles out of the 176 collected cycles were complete with blood samples taken within the correct time interval. Of these, 56.8 % were ovulatory by two criteria (ovulation symbol shown on the monitor display and LP progesterone > 6 ng/ml), 33.1 % were possibly ovulatory by one criterion (ovulation symbol shown on the monitor display or LP progesterone > 6 ng/ml), and 10.2 % were anovulatory by both criteria). Ovulation in the previous cycle and in the same cycle did not significantly influence the mean absolute concentrations of the bone markers. However, bone formation (BAP) was higher in the luteal phase of ovulatory cycles than in anovulatory cycles (n. s.) and the relative changes within one cycle were significantly different for bone resorption (CTX) during ovulatory vs. anovulatory cycles (p < 0.01). In 68 pairs of cycles following each other directly, both ovulation in the previous cycle and ovulation in the present cycle influenced CTX, but not the differences of other bone markers. Conclusion: Ovulatory cycles reduce bone resorption in their luteal phase and that of the following cycle. The interaction between ovulation and bone metabolism is complex. Since anovulation may occur in low estrogen states such as pre-anorexic dietary restraint, as well as with high estrogenic circumstances e.g. from functional perimenopausal ovarian cysts, the association with bone changes has been variable in the literature. Accumulating physiological and clinical evidence however point towards a role for ovulation in enhancing bone formation and limiting bone resorption.

SUBMITTER: Niethammer B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4686368 | biostudies-other | 2015 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other

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:IntroductionRecent studies have shown that low serum progesterone levels on the day of embryo transfer (ET) are associated with poorer pregnancy outcome in hormonal replacement therapy cycles. It is of interest to know if serum progesterone levels during late luteal phase (following days after ET) are also related with the chances of ongoing pregnancy.ObjectiveTo evaluate the luteal phase endocrine profile through measurements of serum progesterone and estradiol on days ET+4, ET+7 and ET+11, to test their predictive value in relation to pregnancy outcome.SettingPrivate infertility center, Valencia, Spain.Materials and methodsProspective cohort study performed between June 2017 and August 2018. Eligible patients were aged between 18-42 years, with a normal uterus, and being transferred 1-2 good quality blastocysts in a frozen ET cycle after an artificial endometrial preparation with estradiol valerate and vaginal micronized progesterone (400 mg/12 hours).ResultsA total of 127 patients were included. Mean age = 38.0 ± 3.9 years; BMI = 23.6 ± 3.6 kg/m2; endometrial thickness = 9.1 ± 1.6mm. Overall ongoing pregnancy rate = 47.2% (95%CI:38.3-56.3). Significantly higher levels of serum progesterone were observed on ET+4 (13.6 ± 6.0 vs. 11.1 ± 4.6ng/ml, p = 0.03) and ET+11 (15.7 ± 1.2 vs. 10.3 ± 0.6ng/ml, respectively; p = 0.000) in ongoing pregnancies versus negative β-hCG (β-human chorionic gonadotrophin) cases. On ET+7, ongoing pregnancies also had higher serum progesterone levels (14.2 ± 0.9 vs. 11.7 ± 0.8ng/ml, but did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.07). Serum estradiol levels were not related with pregnancy outcome at any moment of the luteal phase (p > 0.05). On days ET+4, +7 and +11, the ROC analysis showed that serum progesterone levels were predictive of ongoing pregnancy, and Pearson's coefficient showed a significant association (p<0.05) of serum β-hCG levels with serum progesterone.ConclusionsIn hormonal replacement therapy cycles, serum progesterone levels across luteal phase days are associated with pregnancy outcome. Ongoing pregnancies were associated with a higher exposure to progesterone in comparison with pregnancy losses or negative β-hCG. Therefore, serum progesterone might be playing an important role not only during implantation, but also in pregnancy maintenance. It remains unknown if the variability in serum progesterone levels among patients, after receiving the exact same progesterone dose for luteal phase support, is the cause or just a consequence of pregnancy results.

Project description:Although Yoga has the potential to be an alternative physical activity to enhance bone health, there is a lack of high quality evidence for this type of intervention. The purpose of this randomized controlled trial was to examine the effects of a progressive 8-month Ashtanga-based Yoga program on bone turnover markers (BTM), areal bone mineral density (aBMD) and volumetric bone characteristics in premenopausal women. Thirty-four premenopausal women (35-50 years) were randomly assigned either to a Yoga group (YE, n = 16) or a control group (CON, n = 18). Participants in YE group performed 60 minutes of an Ashtanga-based Yoga series 2 times/week with one day between sessions for 8 months, and the session intensity was progressively increased by adding the number of sun salutations (SS). Participants in CON were encouraged to maintain their normal daily lifestyles monitored by the bone specific physical activity questionnaire (BPAQ) at 2 month intervals for 8 months. Body composition was measured by dual energy x-ray absorptiometry (DXA). Bone formation (bone alkaline phosphatase, Bone ALP) and bone resorption (Tartrate-Resistant Acid Phosphatase-5b, TRAP5b) markers were assessed at baseline and after 8 months. aBMD of total body, lumbar spine and dual proximal femur and tibia bone characteristics were measured using DXA and peripheral Quantitative Computed Tomography (pQCT), respectively. We found that the serum Bone ALP concentrations were maintained in YE, but significantly (p = 0.005) decreased in CON after the 8 month intervention, and there were significant (p = 0.002) group differences in Bone ALP percent changes (YE 9.1 ± 4.0% vs. CON -7.1 ± 2.3%). No changes in TRAP5b were found in either group. The 8-month Yoga program did not increase aBMD or tibia bone strength variables. Body composition results showed no changes in weight, fat mass, or % fat, but small significant increases in bone free lean body mass occurred in both groups. The findings of this study suggest that regular long-term Ashtanga Yoga had a small positive effect on bone formation but did not alter aBMD or tibia bone characteristics in premenopausal women. Key pointsRegular long-term Ashtanga-based Yoga program had a small positive effect on bone formation, but no effects were found on bone resorption.None of the bone density or geometry variables were changed by the 8-month Ashtanga-based Yoga intervention.Future Yoga interventions should focus on longer duration and greater frequency to elicit improvements in bone mineral density.

Project description:BackgroundVarious luteal phase supports (LPSs) have been proven to increase the pregnancy rate in fresh cycles of in vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection; however, there is still significant debate regarding the optimal use of LPS.MethodsA systematic review with the use of a network meta-analysis was performed via electronic searching of Ovid MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov and Google Scholar (up to January 2021) to compare the effectiveness and safety of various LPSs, as well as to evaluate the effects of different initiations of LPSs on pregnancy outcomes. The primary outcomes included live birth and ongoing pregnancy, with the results presented as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs).ResultsEighty-nine randomized controlled trials with 29,625 women comparing 14 interventions or placebo/no LPS treatments were included in the meta-analyses. No significant differences were found in terms of the pregnancy outcomes when LPS was started within 48 h after oocyte retrieval versus a delayed initiation between 48 h and 96 h after oocyte retrieval. The addition of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists to progesterone vaginal pessaries showed a significant benefit in terms of live birth (OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.78). Only human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG) was found to be more efficacious than the placebo/no LPS treatment in terms of live birth (OR 15.43, 95% CI 2.03 to 117.12, low evidence). Any active LPSs (except for rectal or subcutaneous progesterone) was significantly more efficacious than the placebo/no LPS treatment in terms of ongoing pregnancy, with ORs ranging between 1.77 (95% CI 1.08 to 2.90) for the vaginal progesterone pessary and 2.14 (1.23 to 3.70) for the intramuscular progesterone treatment. Among the comparisons of efficacy and tolerability between the active treatments, the differences were small and very uncertain.ConclusionDelays in progesterone supplementation until 96 h after oocyte retrieval does not affect pregnancy outcomes. The safety of GnRH agonists during the luteal phase needs to be evaluated in future studies before the applications of these agonists in clinical practice. With comparable efficacy and acceptability, there may be several viable clinical options for LPS.

Dataset Information

Non-reproductive Effects of Anovulation: Bone Metabolism in the Luteal Phase of Premenopausal Women Differs between Ovulatory and Anovulatory Cycles.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets