TY - JOUR
T1 - A novel strategy of using corifollitropin alfa in the ultrashort gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) protocol in unselected patients
T2 - A patient-friendly alternative
AU - Yu, Tzu Ning
AU - Liu, Yung Liang
AU - Wang, Peng Hui
AU - Chen, Chi Huang
AU - Chen, Ching Hui
AU - Tzeng, Chii Ruey
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2019
PY - 2019/9/1
Y1 - 2019/9/1
N2 - Objective: To compare the outcomes of in vitro fertilization (IVF) and fresh embryo transfer (ET) using corifollitropin alfa in ultrashort gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) protocol and GnRH antagonist protocol. Materials and methods: A total of 245 unselected patients undergoing IVF/fresh ET were enrolled between January 1 and December 31, 2017, including 135 treated with ultrashort GnRHa protocol and 110 treated with antagonist protocol. The primary outcomes were number of total injections and outpatient department (OPD) visits before ovulation triggering. The secondary outcomes were the duration of stimulation, dosage of additional gonadotropin for ovarian hyperstimulation, rates of pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, live birth, ovarian response, and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) rate. Results: Patients treated with ultrashort GnRHa required less additional gonadotropin, fewer total injections, but had better ovarian responses, including more oocytes retrieved, more metaphase II oocytes, and more blastocysts than those treated with antagonist did. A premature LH surge occurred only in six patients treated with antagonist protocol. The rates of pregnancy (37.0% vs. 43.6%), clinical pregnancy (25.2% vs. 34.6%), and live birth (19.3% vs. 30.0%) did not differ significantly between the two groups. The OHSS rate was similar in the two groups. Conclusion: In unselected patients using corifollitropin alfa, the ultrashort GnRHa protocol needed lower dose of additional gonadotropin and fewer injections but produced similar pregnancy outcomes than antagonist protocol did, suggesting that the ultrashort GnRHa protocol could be an alternative.
AB - Objective: To compare the outcomes of in vitro fertilization (IVF) and fresh embryo transfer (ET) using corifollitropin alfa in ultrashort gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) protocol and GnRH antagonist protocol. Materials and methods: A total of 245 unselected patients undergoing IVF/fresh ET were enrolled between January 1 and December 31, 2017, including 135 treated with ultrashort GnRHa protocol and 110 treated with antagonist protocol. The primary outcomes were number of total injections and outpatient department (OPD) visits before ovulation triggering. The secondary outcomes were the duration of stimulation, dosage of additional gonadotropin for ovarian hyperstimulation, rates of pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, live birth, ovarian response, and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) rate. Results: Patients treated with ultrashort GnRHa required less additional gonadotropin, fewer total injections, but had better ovarian responses, including more oocytes retrieved, more metaphase II oocytes, and more blastocysts than those treated with antagonist did. A premature LH surge occurred only in six patients treated with antagonist protocol. The rates of pregnancy (37.0% vs. 43.6%), clinical pregnancy (25.2% vs. 34.6%), and live birth (19.3% vs. 30.0%) did not differ significantly between the two groups. The OHSS rate was similar in the two groups. Conclusion: In unselected patients using corifollitropin alfa, the ultrashort GnRHa protocol needed lower dose of additional gonadotropin and fewer injections but produced similar pregnancy outcomes than antagonist protocol did, suggesting that the ultrashort GnRHa protocol could be an alternative.
KW - Antagonist protocol
KW - Corifollitropin alfa
KW - Fresh embryo transfer
KW - In vitro fertilization
KW - Ultrashort GnRHa protocol
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85071365846&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85071365846&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.tjog.2019.07.013
DO - 10.1016/j.tjog.2019.07.013
M3 - Article
C2 - 31542088
AN - SCOPUS:85071365846
SN - 1028-4559
VL - 58
SP - 656
EP - 661
JO - Taiwanese Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
JF - Taiwanese Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology
IS - 5
ER -