Assisted Reproductive Treatments, Gonadotropin Releasing Hormone Antagonist Protocol, Progesterone Primed Endometrial Protocol
Conditions
Brief summary
The aim of this study was to compare the clinical outcomes in progesterone primed endometrial protocol versus gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol in women undergoing assisted reproductive treatments.
Detailed description
Utilizing the assisted reproductive techniques (ART) has exhibited a substantial rise within the last years, emerging as a crucial modern medicine component with reliable results. The utilized protocols for endometrial preparation in ART are aimed at maximizing the treatments' success. Typically, utilizing gonadotropin-stimulating hormone (GnRH) antagonists or agonists remains involved for preventing an early luteinizing hormone (LH) peak along ovulation prior to oocytes retrieval. The GnRH-antagonist (GnRH-a) protocol is favored by many clinicians as well as patients due to its simplicity, convenience, flexibility, and absence of functional ovarian cysts or menopausal symptoms linked to the agonist protocol. Nevertheless, some RCTs' findings address that the antagonist protocol yields a reduced oocytes' number. Additionally, it exhibits lower pregnancy rates as opposed to the agonist extended therapy.
Interventions
OTHERProgesterone primed endometrial protocol
The cases were received soft progesterone capsules (brand name: Utrogestan, 100 mg, Laboratories Besins International, France) 100 mg and 150 IU of human menopausal gonadotropin (hMG) concomitantly from the menstrual cycle (MC) day 3 until the trigger day.
OTHERGonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol
The cases were received the gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH-ant) protocol consisting of HMG 150 IU's daily injection from MC 3 until the trigger day. GnRH-ant (Cetrotide, 0.25 mg, MerckSerono) was started when at least one of the following criteria were met: LH \>10 IU/L, the presence of at least one follicle with mean diameter \>14 mm, or serum E2 level \>600 pg/mL.
Sponsors
New Valley University
Study design
Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE
Eligibility
Sex/Gender
FEMALE
Age
21 Years to 40 Years
Healthy volunteers
No
Inclusion criteria
* Age 21 to 40 years. * A basal antral follicle count (AFC) \<6. * All patients had to have a body mass index between 18.5 to 29.9 kg/m2. * Undergoing IVF/ICSI cycles. * With previous poor response to conventional prolonged therapy utilizing GnRH agonists (retrieving three oocytes).
Exclusion criteria
* Cycles with fresh embryo transfer. * Transfers of cleavage embryos (d2/d3). * Embryos from cycles with preimplantation genetic screening. * Cryopreservation of oocytes. * Oocyte donation cycles. * Cycles that produced embryos but without et at the time of the analysis.
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| The number of retrieved oocytes | 34 to 36 hours post HCG administration | Retrieved oocytes will be collected after ovarian induction by gonadotropin injection |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Pregnancy rate | Fourteen days following the transfer | Biochemical pregnancy was determined as serum HCG higher than 25 mIU/ml at twelve to fourteen days following the transfer. Gynecological ultrasound assessment was accomplished at thirty to thirty-five following the transfer. Additionally, the gestational sac existence was regarded as clinical pregnancy, with the clinical pregnancy rate = (clinical pregnancy cycles' number/ all transfer cycles' number) × 100%. Moreover, live birth rate equals (live birth cycles' number/ all transfer cycles' number) × 100% |
Countries
Egypt
Outcome results
None listed