Does recurrent implantation failure exist? Prevalence and outcomes of five consecutive euploid blastocyst transfers in 123 987 patients.

STUDY QUESTION: What are the clinical pregnancy and live birth rates in women who underwent up to two more euploid blastocyst transfers after three failures in the absence of another known factor that affects implantation? SUMMARY ANSWER: The fourth and fifth euploid blastocyst transfers resulted in similar live birth rates of 40% and 53.3%, respectively, culminating in a cumulative live birth rate of 98.1% (95% CI = 96.5-99.6%) after five euploid blastocyst transfers. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: The first three euploid blastocysts have similar implantation and live birth rates and provide a cumulative live birth rate of 92.6%. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: An international multi-center retrospective study was conducted at 25 individual clinics. The study period spanned between January 2012 and December 2022. A total of 123 987 patients with a total of 64 572 euploid blastocyst transfers were screened for inclusion. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Patients with a history of any embryo transfer at another clinic, history of any unscreened embryo transfer at participating clinics, parental karyotype abnormalities, the use of donor oocytes or a gestational carrier, untreated intracavitary uterine pathology (e.g. polyp, leiomyoma), congenital uterine anomalies, adenomyosis, communicating hydrosalpinx, endometrial thickness <6 mm prior to initiating of progesterone, use of testicular sperm due to non-obstructive azoospermia in the male partner, transfer of an embryo with a reported intermediate chromosome copy number (i.e. mosaic), preimplantation genetic testing cycles for monogenic disorders, or structural chromosome rearrangements were excluded. Ovarian stimulation protocols and embryology laboratory procedures including trophectoderm biopsy followed the usual practice of each center. The ploidy status of blastocysts was determined with comprehensive chromosome screening. Endometrial preparation protocols followed the usual practice of participating centers and included programmed cycles, natural or modified natural cycles. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: A total of 105 (0.085% of the total population) patients met the criteria and underwent at least one additional euploid blastocyst transfer after failing to achieve a positive pregnancy test with three consecutive euploid blastocyst transfers. Outcomes of the fourth and fifth euploid blastocyst transfers were similar across participating centers. Overall, the live birth rate was similar with the fourth and fifth euploid blastocysts (40% vs 53.3%, relative risk = 1.33, 95% CI = 0.93-1.9, P value = 0.14). Sensitivity analyses excluding blastocysts biopsied on Day 7 postfertilization, women with a BMI >30 kg/m2, cycles using non-ejaculate or donor sperm, double-embryo transfer cycles, and cycles in which the day of embryo transfer was modified due to endometrial receptivity assay test result yielded similar results. Where data were available, the fourth euploid blastocyst had similar live birth rate with the first one (relative risk = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.58-1.21, P = 0.29). The cumulative live birth rate after five euploid blastocyst transfers was 98.1% (95% CI = 96.5-99.6%). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Retrospective design has its own inherent limitations. Patients continuing with a further euploid embryo transfer and patients dropping out from treatment after three failed euploid transfers can be systematically different, perhaps with regard to ovarian reserve or economic status. WIDER IMPLICATION OF THE FINDINGS: Implantation failure seems to be mainly due to embryonic factors. Given the stable and high live birth rates up to five euploid blastocysts, unexplained recurrent implantation failure should have a prevalence of <2%. Proceeding with another embryo transfer can be the best next step once a known etiology for implantation failure is ruled out. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): None. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation: for whom, when and how?

Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) is being increasingly used for ovarian stimulation in assisted reproductive technology. Different progestins have been used with similar success. The available studies suggest a similar response to ovarian stimulation with gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogues. Any differences in the duration of stimulation or gonadotrophin consumption are minor and clinically insignificant. PPOS has the advantage of oral administration and lower medication costs than GnRH analogues. As such it is clearly more cost-effective for fertility preservation and planned freeze-all cycles, but when fresh embryo transfer is intended PPOS can be less cost-effective depending on the local direct and indirect costs of the additional initial frozen embryo transfer cycle. Oocytes collected in PPOS cycles have similar developmental potential, including blastocyst euploidy rates. Frozen embryo transfer outcomes of PPOS and GnRH analogue cycles seem to be similar in terms of both ongoing pregnancy/live birth rates and obstetric and perinatal outcomes. While some studies have reported lower cumulative live birth rates with PPOS, they have methodological issues, including arbitrary definitions of the cumulative live birth rate. PPOS has been used in all patient types (except progesterone receptor-positive breast cancer patients) with consistent results and seems a patient friendly and cost-effective choice if a fresh embryo transfer is not intended.

Endometriosis, staging, infertility and assisted reproductive technology: time for a rethink.

How endometriosis causes infertility, with the exception of tubal dysfunction caused by adhesions, is unclear. The inflammatory milieu in the pelvis and impaired receptivity of the eutopic endometrium are considered to be possible factors. Anatomical staging systems fail to predict the fertility status of endometriosis patients. Data from assisted reproductive technology cycles consistently suggest that oocytes from patients with endometriosis have a normal potential to develop into euploid blastocysts. Moreover, oocyte or embryo recipients with endometriosis seem to have similar or slightly lower pregnancy and live birth rates compared with recipients without endometriosis, suggesting that eutopic endometrium is not or is only minimally affected, which may be caused by undiagnosed adenomyosis. In-vivo observations from women with endometriomas provide evidence against a detrimental effect of endometriomas on oocytes. Combined with the absence of an obvious improvement in fertility following the surgical destruction or excision of peritoneal endometriosis or from temporary medical suppression of the disease and the associated inflammation, the available evidence makes endometriosis-associated infertility questionable in the absence of tubal dysfunction caused by adhesions. It is likely that no anatomical staging will correlate with fertility beyond assessing tubal function. In patients with endometriosis assisted reproductive technology is as effective as for other indications.

Should the trigger to oocyte retrieval interval be different in progestin-primed ovarian stimulation cycles?

RESEARCH QUESTION: Does the trigger to oocyte retrieval interval (TORI) affect oocyte maturation rates differently in progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) and gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist cycles? DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study. The interaction between the stimulation protocol and TORI was assessed in a linear mixed effects multivariable regression analysis with oocyte maturation rate as the dependent variable, and stimulation protocol (GnRH antagonist or PPOS), age (continuous), gonadotrophin type (FSH or human menopausal gonadotrophin), trigger (human chorionic gonadotrophin [HCG] or GnRH agonist), TORI (continuous) and days of stimulation (continuous) as the independent variables. Oocyte maturation rate was defined as number of metaphase II oocytes/number of cumulus-oocyte complexes retrieved. The maturation rate was calculated per cycle and treated as a continuous variable. RESULTS: A total of 473 GnRH antagonist and 205 PPOS cycles (121 conventional PPOS and 84 flexible PPOS) were analysed. The median (quartiles) female age was 36 (32-40) years. Of these cycles, 493 were triggered with HCG and 185 with a GnRH agonist. The TORI ranged between 33.6 and 39.1 h, with a median (quartiles) of 36.2 (36-36.4) hours. Maturation rates were similar between fixed PPOS, flexible PPOS and antagonist cycles (median 80%, 75% and 75%, respectively, P = 0.15). There was no significant interaction between the stimulation protocols and TORI for oocyte maturation. CONCLUSIONS: PPOS cycles do not seem to require a longer TORI than GnRH antagonist cycles.

Association of 'normal' early follicular FSH concentrations with unexpected poor or suboptimal response when ovarian reserve markers are reassuring: a retrospective cohort study.

RESEARCH QUESTION: Are basal FSH measurements, when elevated within its normal range, useful for assessing overall ovarian response and predicting unexpected poor or suboptimal ovarian response? DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study of ovarian stimulation cycles. RESULTS: A total of 1058 ovarian stimulation cycles (891 first, 167 repeated) were included. Anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) values were categorized into four (0 to ≤0.6, >0.6 to ≤1.2, >1.2 to ≤3.0, >3.0 to ≤6.25 ng/ml) and basal FSH levels into four groups (<25th percentile: >3.5 to 6.1 IU/ml; 25-75th percentile: >6.1 to ≤8.5 IU/ml; >75-90th percentile: >8.5 to ≤9.9 IU/ml; >90th percentile: >9.9 to ≤12.5 IU/ml). Including only first cycles, a significant independent effect of basal FSH on retrieved cumulus-oocyte complex (COC) count was seen for all basal FSH categories (>90th, >75 to ≤90th, >25 to ≤75th compared with ≤25th percentile, P < 0.001, P = 0.001 and P = 0.007, respectively), when adjusted for age, body mass index (BMI), AMH, antral follicle count (AFC), starting dose and gonadotrophin type. Including only first cycles, patients aged 35 years or older with AFC of 5 or above and AMH 1.2 ng/ml or above, showed significantly higher odds of unexpected poor or suboptimal response if they had higher basal FSH values. Most prominently in the above 90th percentile group (OR 8.64, 95% CI 2.84 to 28.47 compared with <25th percentile) but lower categories (>25th to ≤75th percentile: OR 3.04, 95% CI 1.42 t 6.99; >75th to ≤90th percentile: OR 3.47, 95% CI 1.28 to 9.83 compared with ≤25th percentile) also showed a significant association after adjusting for age, AMH, BMI, AFC, dose, and gonadotrophin type. In patients with a second cycle, an increase in FSH levels in the second round compared with the first was associated with fewer retrieved COCs (estimate: -0.44, 95% CI -0.44 to -0.05, P = 0.027). This effect was adjusted for changes in age, FSH, AFC, starting dose, stimulation duration and change in medication type. CONCLUSIONS: Basal FSH is independently associated with overall ovarian response. Moreover, it is associated with unexpected poor or suboptimal response in patients, who would fulfill POSEIDON group 2 criteria after oocyte retrieval.

Walking on thin endometrium.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Endometrial thickness has been regarded a predictor of success in assisted reproductive technology cycles and it seems a common practice to cancel embryo transfer when it is below a cut-off. However, various cut-offs have been proposed without a causal relationship between endometrial thickness and embryo implantation being established, casting doubt on the current dogma. RECENT FINDINGS: Methodological limitations of the available studies on endometrial thickness are increasingly recognized and better designed studies do not demonstrate a cut-off value which requires cancelling an embryo transfer. SUMMARY: Endometrium is important for implantation and a healthy pregnancy; however, ultrasound measured thickness does not seem to be a good marker of endometrial function.

Interindividual variation of progesterone elevation post LH rise: implications for natural cycle frozen embryo transfers in the individualized medicine era.

BACKGROUND: The key to optimal timing of frozen embryo transfer (FET ) is to synchronize the embryo with the receptive phase of the endometrium. Secretory transformation of the endometrium is induced by progesterone. In contrast, detection of the luteinizing hormone (LH) surge is the most common surrogate used to determine the start of secretory transformation and to schedule FET in a natural cycle. The accuracy of LH monitoring to schedule FET in a natural cycle relies heavily on the assumption that the period between the LH surge and ovulation is acceptably constant. This study will determine the period between LH rise and progesterone rise in ovulatory natural menstrual cycles. METHODS: Retrospective observational study including 102 women who underwent ultrasound and endocrine monitoring for a frozen embryo transfer in a natural cycle. All women had serum LH, estradiol and progesterone levels measured on three consecutive days until (including) the day of ovulation defined with serum progesterone level exceeding 1ng/ml. RESULTS: Twenty-one (20.6%) women had the LH rise 2 days prior to progesterone rise, 71 (69.6%) had on the day immediately preceding progesterone rise and 10 (9.8%) on the same day of progesterone rise. Women who had LH rise 2 days prior to progesterone rise had significantly higher body mass index and significantly lower serum AMH levels than women who had LH rise on the same day with progesterone rise. CONCLUSION: This study provides an unbiased account of the temporal relationship between LH and progesterone increase in a natural menstrual cycle. Variation in the period between LH rise and progesterone rise in ovulatory cycles likely has implications for the choice of marker for the start of secretory transformation in frozen embryo transfer cycles. The study participants are representative of the relevant population of women undergoing frozen embryo transfer in a natural cycle.

Why ovarian stimulation should be aimed to maximize oocyte yield.

The ultimate measure of success of assisted reproductive technology (ART) is the cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) per ovarian stimulation cycle, which increases with every oocyte collected. However, the adverse effects of ovarian stimulation on endometrial receptivity, as well as the risks of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) and adverse obstetric and neonatal outcomes, are observed to increase with ovarian response to stimulation. To mitigate these risks, mild stimulation has been hailed as the safer patient-friendly approach with the additional benefit of cutting the cost of gonadotrophins. Yet accumulating data demonstrate the absence of an adverse effect of ovarian stimulation on oocytes as well as on obstetric and neonatal outcomes, and multiple preventive strategies have been introduced for OHSS. The widespread use of vitrification revolutionized ART by enabling the liberal use of cycle segmentation to minimize the risk of OHSS and avoid impaired endometrial receptivity due to ovarian stimulation. Vitrification also allowed every oocyte to contribute to the CLBR. Thus, it is questionable whether the cost savings from gonadotrophins during the index ovarian stimulation offset the cost saving by preventing repeat ovarian stimulation and repeat laboratory procedures per live birth. This paper aims to prove by contradiction that ovarian stimulation should be aimed to maximize oocyte yield.

Free your patients and yourself from day 2-3: start ovarian stimulation any time in freeze-all cycles.

Ovarian stimulation for assisted reproductive technology is traditionally started in the early follicular phase. The essential rationale is to allow timely follicle growth and oocyte retrieval to ensure synchronization of the in-vitro cultured embryos with the receptive period of the endometrium in a fresh transfer cycle. In addition, conventional thought suggested that follicle recruitment happened only once, around menstruation. A deeper understanding of folliculogenesis, advances in cryobiology and an increasing proportion of freeze-all cycles provide a unique opportunity here. Experience from oncofertility patients as well as infertile women and oocyte donors who underwent ovarian stimulation in different phases of the menstrual cycle, dubbed 'random start' cycles, suggests that the number of oocytes collected and their reproductive potential do not depend on the time of starting ovarian stimulation, although the duration of stimulation and gonadotrophin consumption can vary slightly. It may be time to free both patients and clinics from the obsession with starting ovarian stimulation in the early follicular phase in planned freeze-all cycles. The flexibility provided by random start cycles is one aspect of individualizing treatment to patients' needs.

A critical appraisal of studies on endometrial thickness and embryo transfer outcome.

A receptive endometrium is required for successful embryo implantation. Endometrial thickness, as measured by ultrasonography, is the most commonly used marker of endometrial receptivity in assisted reproductive technology cycles. Several factors simultaneously affect both endometrial thickness and probability of live birth, including age, oestradiol concentration and oocyte number, among others. Most of the studies investigating a relationship between endometrial thickness and embryo transfer outcomes are retrospective and do not adequately address confounding factors, in addition to other limitations. Despite multiple meta-analyses and studies with large numbers of cycles, controversy still exists. The difference between the results from prospective and retrospective studies is also striking. This article presents a critical appraisal of the studies on endometrial thickness and embryo transfer outcomes in order to highlight methodological issues and how they can be overcome in future studies. Currently available evidence does not seem to support a modification of management just because endometrial thickness is below an arbitrary threshold.

Recurrent implantation failure: a plea for a widely adopted rational definition.

Most proposed definitions of recurrent implantation failure (RIF) are based on clinical judgement, probably affected by patients' demands. They are not based on robust statistical considerations. As a result, a diagnosis of RIF is commonly made too early, exposing couples to the risk of overdiagnosis and overtreatment. However, the situation is changing, and three statistical approaches have recently been proposed. The first is a probability model based on the chances of success per cycle and suggests for the definition three failed oocyte retrieval cycles with all embryos being transferred in women younger than 40 years of age. The second approach suggests an individualized diagnosis that takes into consideration multiple factors, while the third is also based on individualization but mainly relies on anticipated euploidy rates across the female age range. All these approaches have their pros and cons. Regardless of the specific peculiarities, they represent steps in the right direction, with the intent of providing a statistically sound definition. However, these attempts will not be useful unless endorsed by the scientific community in general. There is a pressing need for a rigorous and shared definition of RIF that will be widely accepted by researchers, scientific societies and other stakeholders, including patients.

Oral Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Antagonists in the Treatment of Uterine Myomas: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-analysis of Efficacy Parameters and Adverse Effects.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this systematic review is to gather and synthesize evidence regarding the use of oral gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist for the treatment of bleeding associated with uterine myomas. DATA SOURCES: Web of Science, and MEDLINE databases were searched electronically on March 5, 2021, using combinations of the relevant Medical Subject Headings terms and keywords. The search was restricted to the English language and to human studies. METHODS OF STUDY SELECTION: Only randomized controlled trials involving patients with heavy menstrual bleeding associated with uterine myomas treated with different doses of oral nonpeptide GnRH antagonists with or without add-back therapy were included. Studies comparing oral nonpeptide GnRH antagonists with treatments other than placebo were also excluded. TABULATION, INTEGRATION, AND RESULTS: A total of 5 randomized trials including 2463 women were included in the analyses. Included studies were found to be at low risk of bias. When treatments were compared against placebo, the top 3 treatments for bleeding suppression were elagolix 600 mg, 400 mg, and 200 mg without add-back. Elagolix 600 mg without add-back therapy had a significantly higher risk of amenorrhea than lower doses of elagolix with and without add-back and relugolix as well. Uterine volume changes were more pronounced in therapies without add-back. All treatments were associated with significantly improved quality of life scores, both for myoma symptom-related and overall health-related scores. With the exception of relugolix with high-dose add-back, all treatments significantly increased low-density lipoprotein (LDL) levels. Again, all treatment modalities except for elagolix 200 mg without add-back significantly increased LDL-to-HDL ratio. The increase was highest for treatment without add-back therapy. CONCLUSION: Oral GnRH antagonists seem to be effective for myoma-associated bleeding and for improving quality of life. The safety profile is acceptable for short-term use, but lipid metabolism is affected.

Which is more predictive ovarian sensitivity marker if there is discordance between serum anti-Müllerian hormone levels and antral follicle count? A retrospective analysis.

This retrospective study aims to determine the more predictive ovarian reserve marker when there is discordance between anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) and antral follicle count (AFC) in patients with diminished ovarian reserve (DOR). Patients who underwent ICSI because of DOR were divided into three groups. Group 1: patients with low AMH (<1.1 ng/ml) and AFC (n < 7), group 2: patients with low AMH (<1.1 ng/ml) and normal AFC (n ≥ 7) and group 3: patients with normal AMH (≥1.1 ng/dl) and low AFC (n < 7). Demographic values, follicle output rate (FORT) score and follicle to oocyte index (FOI) score of the groups were compared. Totally, 662 cycles were enrolled in the study. There were 418 cycles in group 1, 167 cycles in group 2 and 77 cycles in group 3. As the primary result, FORT and FOI scores were higher in group 3 than the other two groups. Median FORT Score with quartiles: group 1: 100 (66-150), group 2: 71 (57-100), group 3: 136 (96-200), p<.01 - median FOI score with quartiles: group 1: 83 (50-140), group 2: 71 (40-100), group 3: 116 (66-216), p<.01. In conclusion, serum AMH level has more predictive value for stimulation success if there is discordance with AFC.Impact StatementWhat is already known on this subject? Female age, serum Anti-Müllerian Hormone (AMH) levels, and antral follicle count (AFC) are commonly used to assess ovarian reserve and predict response to ovarian stimulation. AMH and AFC are both positively correlated with ovarian reserve.What do the results of this study add? If there is discordance between AFC and AMH in patients with diminished ovarian reserve (DOR), the ovarian response is better in patients with high AMH and low AFC than the patients with low AMH and high AFC.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? It is important to assess both AFC and AMH before controlled ovarian hyperstimulation, to predict ovarian response in DOR patients, rather than assessing AFC or AMH alone.

Outcomes of SARS-CoV-2 infected pregancies after medically assisted reproduction.

STUDY QUESTION: What is the impact of severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection on the outcome of a pregnancy after medically assisted reproduction (MAR)? SUMMARY ANSWER: Our results suggest that MAR pregnancies are not differentially affected by SARS-CoV-2 infection compared to spontaneous pregnancies. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Information on the effects of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) on pregnancy after MAR is scarce when women get infected during MAR or early pregnancy, even though such information is vital for informing women seeking pregnancy. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: Data from SARS-CoV-2 affected MAR pregnancies were collected between May 2020 and June 2021 through a voluntary data collection, organised by the European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology (ESHRE). PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: All ESHRE members were invited to participate to an online data collection for SARS-CoV-2-infected MAR pregnancies. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: The dataset includes 80 cases from 32 countries, including 67 live births, 10 miscarriages, 2 stillbirths and 1 maternal death. An additional 25pregnancies were ongoing at the time of writing. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: An international data registry based on voluntary contribution can be subject to selective reporting with possible risks of over- or under-estimation. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: The current data can be used to guide clinical decisions in the care of women pregnant after MAR, in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The authors acknowledge the support of ESHRE for the data registry and meetings. J.S.T. reports grants or contracts from Sigrid Juselius Foundation, EU and Helsinki University Hospital Funds, outside the scope of the current work. The other authors declare that they have no conflict of interest. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

The calm after the storm: re-starting ART treatments safely in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic created a significant impact on medically assisted reproduction (MAR) services. ESHRE decided to mobilize resources in order to collect, analyse, monitor, prepare and disseminate severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) knowledge specifically related to ART and early pregnancy. This article presents the impact of the SARS-CoV-2 pandemic focusing on reproductive healthcare. It details the rationale behind the guidance prepared to support MAR services in organizing and managing the re-start of treatments or in case of any future wave of COVID-19 disease. The guidance includes information on patient selection and informed consent, staff and patient triage and testing, adaptation of ART services, treatment planning and code of conduct. The initiatives detailed in this article are not necessarily COVID-specific and such action plans could be applied effectively to manage similar emergency situations in different areas of medicine, in the future.

Assisted reproductive technology for women with endometriosis, a clinically oriented review.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To discuss optimal management of an assisted reproductive technology (ART) cycle in women with endometriosis. RECENT FINDINGS: New studies involving euploid embryo transfers provide more insight on the etiology of endometriosis-associated infertility. Oocyte competence to reach live birth seems unlikely to be affected by the disease. Routine medical or surgical treatment prior to an ART cycle does not appear beneficial. Short gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist or progestin primed ovarian stimulation protocols seem to be proper first choices, depending on the intention for a fresh embryo transfer. Low-quality evidence supports frozen thawed over fresh embryo transfer. Ovarian stimulation for ART does not seem to be associated with symptom progression or recurrence. SUMMARY: How endometriosis affects fertility is still unclear, but ART is an effective pragmatic treatment. Each woman with endometriosis must be assessed with a holistic approach, and in the absence of an indication for otherwise, ART cycles can be kept simple with patient-friendly protocols. Whether a frozen embryo transfer is better than a fresh one should be investigated.

Progestins versus GnRH analogues for pituitary suppression during ovarian stimulation for assisted reproductive technology: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

This systematic review and meta-analysis of comparative studies investigated whether progestins are as effective as gonadotrophin releasing hormone (GnRH) analogues for pituitary suppression in assisted reproduction. The primary outcome was live birth rate per woman. Secondary outcomes were live birth or ongoing pregnancy per woman and per embryo transfer, ongoing pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, numbers of oocytes and metaphase-two oocytes, duration of stimulation and gonadotrophin consumption. Adverse events included miscarriage, ectopic pregnancy and multiple pregnancy rates. The GRADE system was used to assess the quality of evidence. Seven studies involving a total of 2047 women were included. Three studies compared a progestin with a GnRH antagonist and four studies compared a progestin with a GnRH agonist. Most studies are non-randomized and report outcomes per embryo transfer, rather than per woman. Although progestins were similar to GnRH antagonists in effectiveness and safety parameters, they were associated with significantly higher live birth or ongoing pregnancy per embryo transfer compared with the short GnRH agonist protocol (RR 1.49, 95% CI 1.16 to 1.91). Progestin primed stimulation lasted significantly longer (mean difference 0.61 days, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.89) and required significantly more gonadotrophins (mean difference 433.2 IU, 95% CI 311.11 to 555.19) than the short GnRH agonist protocol, but the differences were clinically negligible. Safety parameters were similar between progestins and GnRH agonists. In conclusion, progestins can effectively prevent premature ovulation in assisted reproductive technology cycles. If larger and well-designed studies confirm these findings, progestins may be an effective and low-cost alternative to GnRH analogues when a fresh embryo transfer is not planned owing to a medical indication.

Subcutaneous versus vaginal progesterone for vitrified-warmed blastocyst transfer in artificial cycles.

RESEARCH QUESTION: Does subcutaneous progesterone provide similar live birth or ongoing pregnancy rates as vaginal progesterone in frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles? DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study (n = 214 women), consisting of 107 women who received subcutaneous progesterone for FET in artificial cycles and 107 women receiving vaginal progesterone who were matched for age and treatment cycle rank acted as controls. All embryos were transferred in an artificial cycle with 6 mg per day oral oestradiol valerate starting on the second or third day of the menstrual cycle. Patients underwent transvaginal ultrasound on the 10th day of priming, and subcutaneous progesterone (50 mg/day) or vaginal progesterone (180 mg/day) was started if the endometrium had a trilinear pattern regardless of its thickness. Embryo transfer was carried out on the sixth day of progesterone administration. Oestradiol and progesterone were continued until a negative pregnancy test, 10 days after the transfer, or until the completion of 10th gestational week. Main outcome measures were live birth or ongoing pregnancy rates. RESULTS: Baseline characteristics were similar between the groups. Positive pregnancy test rates (64.5% versus 58.9%; P = 0.40; RR 1.1; 95% CI 0.89 to 1.35), live birth or ongoing pregnancy rates (39.3% versus 35.5%; P = 0.57; RR 1.11; 95% CI 0.78 to 1.56) and miscarriage rates (29% versus 25.5%; P = 0.68; RR 1.08; 95% CI 0.76 to 1.55) were similar in the subcutaneous progesterone and vaginal progesterone groups, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Subcutaneous progesterone seems to be an effective alternative to vaginal progesterone in patients undergoing FET. Randomized controlled trials comparing it with different progesterone preparations, routes and protocols are needed to better define its role.

Laparoscopic sacral colpopexy with polyester fiber suture: Ozerkan modification.

INTRODUCTION AND HYPOTHESIS: Mesh-related problems are significant complications of laparoscopic sacral colpopexy. The conventional technique precludes performing laparoscopic sacral colpopexy without using a mesh. We describe the Ozerkan modification for laparoscopic sacral colpopexy using a polyester fiber suture instead of a standard mesh and report 1-year objective and subjective outcomes. METHODS: Women diagnosed with stage ≥ 2 vaginal vault prolapse were prospectively recruited for the Ozerkan modification between 2015 and 2017. The primary outcome was the anatomic success of the repair, defined by objective parameters using the pelvic organ prolapse quantification system (stage 0 or 1). Secondary outcomes were subjective outcomes assessed with the quality of life scores. RESULTS: Twenty-two women underwent the Ozerkan modified laparoscopic sacrocolpopexy. Mean operation time was 85.6 min. Mean estimated blood loss was 71 ml. One patient was lost during the clinical follow-up in the outpatient clinic up to 1 year. Nineteen of 21 patients had stage 0 or 1 prolapse at the end of 1 year. Two patients were not satisfied with their pelvic floor after 1 year. Both the objective and subjective cure rates were 90.4%. There were no bladder or bowel complications during the peri- or postoperative period. CONCLUSIONS: The new modification of laparoscopic sacral colpopexy seems a feasible and safe option to avoid mesh complications in the treatment of vaginal vault prolapse.