Comparison of Luteal Phase Estradiol Priming Stimulation Protocol and the Standard Antagonist Protocol in Patients With Diminished Ovarian Reserve Undergoing ICSI

ObjectiveThis study aimed to compare the IVF outcomes in patients with diminished ovarian reserve stimulated with luteal phase estradiol (E2) priming protocol versus the standard antagonist protocol.MethodsThe study included 603 patients undergoing intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles (ICSI) with the diagnosis of diminished ovarian reserve (DOR) who were stimulated with the luteal E2 priming protocol (n=181) and the standard antagonist protocol (n=422). Groups were compared in terms of demographic characteristics, ovarian stimulation results, ICSI cycle outcomes, clinical pregnancy, and live birth rates per embryo transfer. ResultsThe duration of ovarian stimulation was longer, and the total gonadotropin dose used was significantly higher (p=0.001) in the E2 priming protocol group than the antagonist protocol group. The number of embryos transferred was higher in the antagonist protocol group compared with the luteal E2 priming protocol group (0.87±0.75 vs. 0.64±0.49; p=001), but there was no statistically significant difference in terms of embryo quality (p>0.05). The cycle cancellation rate and the clinical pregnancy and live birth rates per embryo transfer were similar in both groups.ConclusionsThere was no significant difference between the ICSI outcomes of the patients diagnosed with diminished ovarian reserve stimulated with the antagonist protocol and the luteal E2 priming protocol. The antagonist protocol might be considered more advantageous because of the shorter treatment duration and lower doses of gonadotropin, and it allows more embryos to be transferred. Additional randomized controlled trials are needed to verify these findings.

[1]  J. Labrosse,et al.  A comparison of the effects of three luteal phase support protocols with estrogen on in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer outcomes in patients on a GnRH antagonist protocol , 2019, JBRA assisted reproduction.

[2]  N. Louanjli,et al.  Luteal estradiol pretreatment of poor and normal responders during GnRH antagonist protocol , 2019, Gynecological endocrinology : the official journal of the International Society of Gynecological Endocrinology.

[3]  A. Erdem,et al.  Comparison of the standard GnRH antagonist protocol and the luteal phase estradiol/GnRH antagonist priming protocol in poor ovarian responders. , 2017, Turkish journal of medical sciences.

[4]  Neeta Singh,et al.  Diminished ovarian reserve and premature ovarian failure: A review , 2016 .

[5]  E. Darai,et al.  Diminished ovarian reserve, premature ovarian failure, poor ovarian responder—a plea for universal definitions , 2015, Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics.

[6]  A. Weissman,et al.  Treatment strategies in assisted reproduction for the poor responder patient , 2012 .

[7]  T. Yoon,et al.  Effect of estrogen priming through luteal phase and stimulation phase in poor responders in in-vitro fertilization , 2012, Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics.

[8]  Sesh Kamal Sunkara,et al.  Association between the number of eggs and live birth in IVF treatment: an analysis of 400 135 treatment cycles. , 2011, Human reproduction.

[9]  C. Venetis,et al.  Addition of growth hormone to gonadotrophins in ovarian stimulation of poor responders treated by in-vitro fertilization: a systematic review and meta-analysis. , 2009, Human reproduction update.

[10]  J. Check,et al.  The effect of a rise or fall of serum estradiol the day before oocyte retrieval in women aged 40-42 with diminished egg reserve. , 2009, Clinical and experimental obstetrics & gynecology.

[11]  M. Hill,et al.  A luteal estradiol protocol for anticipated poor-responder patients may improve delivery rates. , 2009, Fertility and sterility.

[12]  M. Hill,et al.  A luteal estradiol protocol for expected poor-responders improves embryo number and quality. , 2008, Fertility and sterility.

[13]  Z. Rosenwaks,et al.  Use of a luteal estradiol patch and a gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist suppression protocol before gonadotropin stimulation for in vitro fertilization in poor responders. , 2005, Fertility and sterility.

[14]  N. Frydman,et al.  Luteal estradiol pre-treatment coordinates follicular growth during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation with GnRH antagonists. , 2003, Human reproduction.

[15]  A. Levi,et al.  Reproductive outcome in patients with diminished ovarian reserve. , 2001, Fertility and sterility.

[16]  F. Petraglia,et al.  Adjuvant L-arginine treatment for in-vitro fertilization in poor responder patients. , 1999, Human reproduction.

[17]  R. Fanchin,et al.  Synchronization of endogenous and exogenous FSH stimuli in controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH). , 1998, Human reproduction.

[18]  N. Naumann,et al.  Assisted conception following poor ovarian response to gonadotrophin stimulation , 1997, British journal of obstetrics and gynaecology.

[19]  J. Dumoulin,et al.  High-dose human menopausal gonadotropin stimulation in poor responders does not improve in vitro fertilization outcome. , 1996, Fertility and sterility.

[20]  L. Farzadi,et al.  Effect of Estrogen Priming in Antagonist Cycles in Women With Poor Response to IVF Treatment , 2019 .