Ovulation triggering with hCG alone, GnRH agonist alone or in combination? A randomized controlled trial in advanced-age women undergoing IVF/ICSI cycles.

Is a dual ovulation trigger with a combination of GnRH agonist (GnRHa) and hCG superior to single hCG and/or single GnRHa trigger in improving treatment outcomes in advanced-age women (aged ≥ 35 years) undergoing IVF/ICSI treatment? Co-administration of GnRHa and hCG as a dual trigger increases the number of good-quality embryos but it is not associated with a higher number of oocytes retrieved, compared with single hCG or GnRHa trigger. Many studies have demonstrated that a dual trigger has positive impact on oocyte maturation, retrieval rate and pregnancy rate without increasing the risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) in some groups of IVF patients, when compared with single hCG trigger. Few studies have however been conducted to compare a dual trigger with a single GnRHa trigger, and insufficient evidence exists to support which trigger can achieve the best outcomes in IVF patients aged ≥35 years. This was an open-label randomized controlled trial of 510 participants conducted at single reproductive medical center from January 2019 to December 2021. After a sample size calculation performed by retrospectively analyzing our previous clinical data, we planned to recruit 170 patients in each group and 510 patients in total for the study. Women aged ≥35 years undergoing IVF/ICSI treatment, receiving a non-pituitary down-regulation protocol, and with low risk of OHSS, were enrolled in this trial. On the trigger day, patients were randomized into three groups: hCG alone (who received 6000 IU of hCG), GnRHa alone (who received 0.2 mg of triptorelin) and dual trigger (who received 0.2 mg of triptorelin plus 2000 IU of hCG) groups. The primary outcome parameter was the number of retrieved oocytes. The secondary outcome parameters included, among others, the number and rates of mature oocytes, two pronuclei (2PN) embryos and good-quality embryos, as the rates of OHSS, clinical pregnancy, miscarriage and live birth. There were no significant differences in the baseline demographic characteristics among the three groups. The dual trigger was associated with a higher retrieval rate (87.9% vs 84.1% in the hCG group, P = 0.031; 87.9% vs 83.6% in the GnRHa group, P = 0.014). However, the number of retrieved oocytes in the dual trigger group was comparable with those in the hCG group (4.08 ± 2.79 vs 3.60 ± 2.71, P = 0.080) and the GnRHa group (4.08 ± 2.79 vs 3.81 ± 3.38, P = 0.101); comparable data between the groups were also found when analyzing the number of 2PN embryos and the 2PN rate. In the dual trigger group, the numbers of good-quality embryos and viable embryos were both significantly higher than in the hCG group (1.74 ± 1.90 vs 1.19 ± 1.45, P = 0.016 and 2.19 ± 2.11 vs 1.56 ± 1.66, P = 0.008, respectively) and the GnRHa group (1.74 ± 1.90 vs 1.20 ± 1.67, P = 0.003 and 2.19 ± 2.11 vs 1.45 ± 1.75, P = 0.001, respectively). Pregnancy outcomes after fresh embryo transfer (ET) were comparable between the groups. The live birth rate and ongoing pregnancy rate after frozen ET in the dual trigger group were significantly higher than those in the GnRHa group (32.6% vs 14.1%, P = 0.007 and 34.8% vs 17.6%, P = 0.013, respectively), but not superior to those in the hCG group (32.6% vs 27.9%, P = 0.537 and 34.8% vs 27.9%, P = 0.358, respectively). Women of advanced age are quite a heterogeneous population and overlap with poor ovarian responders or patients with diminished ovarian reserve. We therefore could not entirely exclude selection biases or confounding factors. This study was also not a double-blinded trial; the patients in the GnRHa and dual trigger groups could have been affected by the placebo effect. The results of this study suggest that in advanced-age women with low risk of OHSS, a dual trigger or even a single hCG trigger may be a better choice than a single GnRHa trigger. This study was supported by the Shanghai Municipal Health Commission of Science and Research Fund (20184Y0289). The authors declare no conflict of interest. This trial was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR-1800016285). 24 May 2018. 2 January 2019.

Zhou C ，Yang X ，Wang Y ，Xi J ，Pan H ，Wang M ，Zhou Y ，Xiao Y ... -  《-》

Does an FSH surge at the time of hCG trigger improve IVF/ICSI outcomes? A randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study.

Does an artificially induced FSH surge at the time of hCG trigger improve IVF/ICSI outcomes? An additional FSH bolus administered at the time of hCG trigger has no effect on clinical pregnancy rate, embryo quality, fertilization rate, implantation rate and live birth rate in women undergoing the long GnRH agonist (GnRHa) protocol for IVF/ICSI. Normal ovulation is preceded by a surge in both LH and FSH. Few randomized clinical trials have specifically investigated the role of the FSH surge. Some studies indicated that FSH given at hCG ovulation trigger boosts fertilization rate and even prevents ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). This was a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial conducted at a single IVF center, from June 2012 to November 2013. A sample size calculation indicated that 347 women per group would be adequate. A total of 732 women undergoing IVF/ICSI were randomized, using electronically randomized tables, to the intervention or placebo groups. Participants and clinical doctors were blinded to the treatment allocation. Patients aged ≤42 years who were treated with IVF/ICSI owing to tubal factor, male factor, unexplained, endometriosis and multiple factors were enrolled in this trial. Subjects all received a standard long GnRHa protocol for IVF/ICSI and hCG 6000-10 000 IU to trigger oocyte maturation. A total of 364 and 368 patients were randomized to receive a urinary FSH (uFSH) bolus (6 ampules, 450 IU) and placebo, respectively, at the time of the hCG trigger. The primary outcome measure was clinical pregnancy rate. The secondary outcome measures were FSH level on the day of oocyte retrieval, number of oocytes retrieved, good-quality embryo rate, live birth rate and rate of OHSS. There were no significant differences in the baseline demographic characteristics between the two study groups. There were also no significant differences between groups in cycle characteristics, such as the mean number of stimulation days, total gonadotrophin dose and peak estradiol. The clinical pregnancy rate was 51.6% in the placebo group and 52.7% in the FSH co-trigger group, with an absolute rate difference of 1.1% (95% CI -6.1% to 8.3%). The number of oocytes retrieved was 10.47 ± 4.52 and 10.74 ± 5.01 (P = 0.44), the rate of good-quality embryos was 37% and 33.9% (P = 0.093) and the implantation rate was 35% and 36% (P = 0.7) in the placebo group and the FSH co-trigger group, respectively. This was a single-center study, which may limit its effectiveness. The use of uFSH is a limitation, as this is not the same as the natural FSH. We did not collect follicular fluid for further study of molecular changes after the use of uFSH as a co-trigger. Based on previous data and our results, an additional FSH bolus administered at the time of hCG trigger has no benefit on clinical pregnancy rates in women undergoing the long GnRHa protocol in IVF/ICSI: a single hCG trigger is sufficient. This study was supported by the National Key Research and Development Program of China (2016YFC1000205); Sun Yat-Sen University Clinical Research 5010 Program (2016004); the Science and Technology Project of Guangdong Province (2016A020216011 and 2017A020213028); and Science Technology Research Project of Guangdong Province (S2011010004662). There are no conflicts of interest to declare. The trial was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR-TRC-12002246). 20 May 2012. 10 June 2012.

Qiu Q ，Huang J ，Li Y ，Chen X ，Lin H ，Li L ，Yang D ，Wang W ，Zhang Q ... -  《-》

A modified flexible GnRH antagonist protocol using antagonist early cessation and a gonadotropin step-down approach improves live birth rates in fresh cycles: a randomized controlled trial.

Can pregnancy outcomes following fresh elective single embryo transfer (eSET) in gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocols increase using a gonadotropin (Gn) step-down approach with cessation of GnRH antagonist on the day of hCG administration (hCG day) in patients with normal ovarian response? The modified GnRH antagonist protocol using the Gn step-down approach and cessation of GnRH antagonist on the hCG day is effective in improving live birth rates (LBRs) per fresh eSET cycle. Currently, there is no consensus on optimal GnRH antagonist regimens. Studies have shown that fresh GnRH antagonist cycles result in poorer pregnancy outcomes than the long GnRH agonist (GnRHa) protocol. Endometrial receptivity is a key factor that contributes to this phenomenon. An open label randomized controlled trial (RCT) was performed between November 2021 and August 2022. There were 546 patients allocated to either the modified GnRH antagonist or the conventional antagonist protocol at a 1:1 ratio. Both IVF and ICSI cycles were included, and the sperm samples used were either fresh or frozen from the partner, or from frozen donor ejaculates. The primary outcome was the LBRs per fresh SET cycle. Secondary outcomes included rates of implantation, clinical and ongoing pregnancy, miscarriage, and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS), as well as clinical outcomes of ovarian stimulation. Baseline demographic features were not significantly different between the two ovarian stimulation groups. However, in the intention-to-treat (ITT) population, the LBRs in the modified antagonist group were significantly higher than in the conventional group (38.1% [104/273] vs. 27.5% [75/273], relative risk 1.39 [95% CI, 1.09-1.77], P = 0.008). Using a per-protocol (PP) analysis which included all the patients who received an embryo transfer, the LBRs in the modified antagonist group were also significantly higher than in the conventional group (48.6% [103/212] vs. 36.8% [74/201], relative risk 1.32 [95% CI, 1.05-1.66], P = 0.016). The modified antagonist group achieved significantly higher implantation rates, and clinical and ongoing pregnancy rates than the conventional group in both the ITT and PP analyses (P < 0.05). The two groups did not show significant differences between the number of oocytes retrieved or mature oocytes, two-pronuclear zygote (2PN) rates, the number of embryos obtained, blastocyst progression and good-quality embryo rates, early miscarriage rates, or OHSS incidence rates (P > 0.05). A limitation of our study was that the subjects were not blinded to the treatment allocation in the RCT trial. Only women under 40 years of age who had a good prognosis were included in the analysis. Therefore, use of the modified antagonist protocol in older patients with a low ovarian reserve remains to be investigated. In addition, the sample size for Day 5 elective SET was small, so larger trials will be required to strengthen these findings. The modified GnRH antagonist protocol using the Gn step-down approach and cessation of GnRH antagonist on hCG day improved the LBRs per fresh eSET cycle in normal responders. This project was funded by grant 2022YFC2702503 from the National Key Research & Development Program of China and grant 2021140 from the Beijing Health Promotion Association. The authors declare no conflicts of interest. The RCT was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry; Study Number: ChiCTR2100053453. 21 November 2021. 23 November 2021.

Xu B ，Geerts D ，Yuan J ，Wang M ，Li Z ，Lai Q ，Zheng Y ，Liu S ，Yang S ，Zhu G ，Jin L ... -  《-》

GnRH agonist versus HCG triggering in different IVF/ICSI cycles of same patients: a retrospective study.

Yılmaz N ，Ceran MU ，Ugurlu EN ，Gülerman HC ，Engin Ustun Y ... -  《-》

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist versus HCG for oocyte triggering in antagonist-assisted reproductive technology.

Youssef MA ，Van der Veen F ，Al-Inany HG ，Mochtar MH ，Griesinger G ，Nagi Mohesen M ，Aboulfoutouh I ，van Wely M ... -  《Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews》