Luteal phase support using micronized vaginal progesterone as pessaries or capsules in artificial cycles: is there any difference?

RESEARCH QUESTION: Is there a difference between the proportion of patients with serum progesterone <8.8 ng/ml on the day of embryo transfer when micronized vaginal progesterone (MVP) for luteal phase support (LPS) is given as pessaries versus capsules? DESIGN: This retrospective, matched-cohort, single-centre study compared pessaries (Cyclogest) versus capsules (Utrogestan, Progeffik) for LPS in hormone replacement treatment-embryo transfer (HRT-ET) cycles. Patients under 50 years old with a triple-layer endometrial thickness of ≥6.5 mm underwent transfer of one or two blastocysts. Serum progesterone concentrations were measured on the day of transfer; patients with concentrations <8.8 ng/ml received a single 'rescue' dose of additional progesterone by subcutaneous injection. RESULTS: In total 2665 HRT-ET cycles were analysed; 663 (24.9%) used pessaries for LPS and 2002 (75.1%) used capsules. Mean serum progesterone concentrations with standard deviations on the day of embryo transfer were significantly higher in the group using MVP pessaries compared with those using capsules (14.5 ± 5.1 versus 13.0 ± 4.8 ng/ml; P = 0.000). The percentage of participants with suboptimal serum progesterone concentrations on the day of embryo transfer (<8.8 ng/ml) was significantly lower in the pessary group than the capsule group (10.3%, 95% confidence interval [CI] 7.9-12.6% versus 17.9%, 95% CI 16.2-19.6%; adjusted odds ratio 0.426, 95% CI 0.290-0.625; P = 0.000). No differences in pregnancy outcome were observed between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Using MVP pessaries rather than capsules for LPS resulted in significantly fewer patients having suboptimal serum progesterone concentrations on the day of embryo transfer. Consequently, almost 50% fewer patients in the pessary group needed rescue treatment.

Investigation of luteal HCG supplementation in GnRH-agonist-triggered fresh embryo transfer cycles: a randomized controlled trial.

RESEARCH QUESTION: Does splitting the human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG) support in IVF cycles triggered by a gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist result in a better progesterone profile? DESIGN: Randomized controlled three-arm study, performed at the Fertility Clinic, Odense University Hospital, Denmark. Patients with 12-25 follicles ≥12 mm were randomized into three groups: Group 1 - ovulation triggered with 6500 IU HCG; Group 2 - ovulation triggered with 0.5 mg GnRH agonist, followed by 1500 IU HCG on the day of oocyte retrieval (OCR); and Group 3 - ovulation triggered with 0.5 mg GnRH agonist, followed by 1000 IU HCG on the day of OCR and 500 IU HCG on OCR + 5. All groups received 180 mg vaginal progesterone. Progesterone concentrations were analysed in eight blood samples from each patient. RESULTS: Sixty-nine patients completed the study. Baseline and laboratory data were comparable. Progesterone concentration peaked on OCR + 4 in Groups 1 and 2, and peaked on OCR + 6 in Group 3. On OCR + 6, the progesterone concentration in Group 2 was significantly lower compared with Groups 1 and 3 (P = 0.003 and P < 0.001, respectively). On OCR + 8, the progesterone concentration in Group 3 was significantly higher compared with the other groups (both P<0.001). Progesterone concentrations were significantly higher in Group 3 from OCR + 6 until OCR + 14 compared with the other groups (all P ≤ 0.003). Four patients developed ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome in Group 3. CONCLUSION: Sequential HCG support after a GnRH agonist trigger provides a better progesterone concentration in the luteal phase.

Safety profiles of offspring born from early-follicular long-acting GnRH agonist protocol and daily mid-luteal GnRH agonist protocol: a retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: The gonadotropin hormone-releasing hormone agonists (GnRH-a) have been widely used for controlled ovarian stimulation in assisted reproductive technology (ART). The early-follicular long-acting GnRH-a long protocol (EFL) and the luteal phase short-acting GnRH-a long protocol (LPS) are commonly used GnRH agonist protocols. We conducted a retrospective analysis to assess and compare the rates of congenital abnormalities and safety profiles in offspring born from the EFL and LPS protocols. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study to analyze and compare neonatal data from patients who using EFL or LPS protocols at our center between January 1, 2014, and June 30, 2017. The study ultimately included 1810 neonates from 1401 cycles using the EFL protocol and 2700 neonates from 2129 cycles using the LPS protocol.The main outcome measures are gestational age at delivery, birth weight, and congenital anomaly rate.To assess the influence of various factors on congenital abnormalities, a random-effects logistic regression model was employed. RESULTS: The EFL and LPS protocols led to similar congenital anomaly rates (1.64% vs. 2.35%, P = 0.149). No significant differences were found between the two groups regarding birth weight and its categories, newborn gender and congenital anomaly rate. The results of the multivariate logistic regression model indicated no association between congenital anomaly and BMI, duration of infertility, treatment protocol, fertilization method, or embryo transfer stage. Compared with singleton pregnancies, the probability of congenital defects in multiple pregnancies was 2.64 times higher (OR: 2.64, 95% CI: 1.72-4.05, P < 0.0001). Newborns with congenital defects were born with a lower gestational age compared with full-term pregnancies. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, the EFL protocol is considered a safe option for ensuring offspring safety, comparable with the LPS protocol; however, multiple pregnancies represent an independent risk factor for congenital abnormalities. This approach can be widely adopted; however, prioritizing single embryo transfers is strongly recommended to minimize the potential risks associated with multiple pregnancies in offspring.

The combination of dydrogesterone and micronized vaginal progesterone can render serum progesterone level measurements on the day of embryo transfer and rescue attempts unnecessary in an HRT FET cycle.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the role of serum progesterone (P4) on the day of embryo transfer (ET) when dydrogesterone (DYD) and micronized vaginal progesterone (MVP) are combined as luteal phase support (LPS) in a hormone replacement therapy (HRT) frozen ET (FET) cycles. METHODS: Retrospective study, including single euploid HRT FET cycles with DYD and MVP as LPS and P4 measurement on ET day. Initially, patients with P4 levels < 10 ng/ml increased MVP to 400 mg/day; this "rescue" was abandoned later. RESULTS: 560 cycles of 507 couples were included. In 275 women, serum P4 level was < 10 ng/ml on the ET day. Among those with low P4 levels, MVP dose remained unchanged in 65 women (11.6%) and was increased in 210 women (37.5%). Women with P4 levels ≥ 10 ng/ml continued LPS without modification. Overall pregnancy rates in these groups were 61.5% (40/65), 54.8% (115/210), and 48.4% (138/285), respectively (p = n.s.). Association of serum P4 levels with ongoing pregnancy rates was analyzed in women without any additional MVP regardless of serum P4 levels (n = 350); multivariable analysis (adjusted for age, BMI, embryo quality (EQ)) did not show a significant association of serum P4 levels with OPR (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.90-1.02; p = 0.185). Using inverse probability treatment weights, regression analysis in the weighted sample showed no significant association between P4 treatment groups and OP. Compared to fair EQ, the transfer of good EQ increased (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.22-2.15; p = 0.001) and the transfer of a poor EQ decreased the odds of OP (OR 0.73, 95% CI 0.55-0.97; p = 0.029). CONCLUSION: In HRT FET cycle, using LPS with 300 mg/day MVP and 30 mg/day DYD, it appears that serum P4 measurement and increase of MVP in patients with P4 < 10 ng/ml are not necessary.

Strengthened luteal phase support for patients with low serum progesterone on the day of frozen embryo transfer in artificial endometrial preparation cycles: a large-sample retrospective trial.

BACKGROUND: Low serum progesterone on the day of frozen embryo transfer (FET) is associated with diminished pregnancy rates in artificial endometrium preparation cycles, but there is no consensus on whether strengthened luteal phase support (LPS) benefits patients with low progesterone on the FET day in artificial cycles. This single-centre, large-sample retrospective trial was designed to investigate the contribution of strengthened LPS to pregnancy outcomes for groups with low progesterone levels on the FET day in artificial endometrium preparation cycles. METHODS: Women who had undergone the first artificial endometrium preparation cycle after a freeze-all protocol in our clinic from 2016 to 2018 were classified into two groups depending on their serum progesterone levels on the FET day. Routine LPS was administered to group B (P ≥ 10.0 ng/ml on the FET day, n = 1261), and strengthened LPS (routine LPS+ im P 40 mg daily) was administered to group A (P < 10.0 ng/ml on the FET day, n = 1295). The primary endpoint was the live birth rate, and the secondary endpoints were clinical pregnancy, miscarriage and neonatal outcomes. RESULTS: The results showed that the clinical pregnancy rate was significantly lower in group A than in group B (48.4% vs 53.2%, adjusted risk ratio (aRR) 0.81, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.68, 0.96), whereas miscarriage rates were similar between the two groups (16.0% vs 14.7%, aRR 1.09, 95% CI 0.77, 1.54). The live birth rate was slightly lower in group A than in group B (39.5% vs 43.3%, aRR 0.84, 95% CI 0.70, 1.0). Birthweights and other neonatal outcomes were similar between the two groups (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The results indicated that the serum progesterone level on the FET day was one of the risk factors predicting the chances of pregnancy in artificial endometrium preparation cycles, and strengthened LPS in patients with low progesterone on the FET day might help to provide a reasonable pregnancy outcome in artificial cycles, although further prospective evidence is needed to confirm this possibility.

A 10-year follow-up on the practice of luteal phase support using worldwide web-based surveys.

BACKGROUND: It has been demonstrated that luteal phase support (LPS) is crucial in filling the gap between the disappearance of exogenously administered hCG for ovulation triggering and the initiation of secretion of endogenous hCG from the implanting conceptus. LPS has a pivotal role of in establishing and maintaining in vitro fertilization (IVF) pregnancies. Over the last decade, a plethora of studies bringing new information on many aspects of LPS have been published. Due to lack of consent between researchers and a dearth of robust evidence-based guidelines, we wanted to make the leap from the bench to the bedside, what are the common LPS practices in fresh IVF cycles compared to current evidence and guidelines? How has expert opinion changed over 10 years in light of recent literature? METHODS: Over a decade (2009-2019), we conducted 4 web-based surveys on a large IVF-specialist website on common LPS practices and controversies. The self-report, multiple-choice surveys quantified results by annual IVF cycles. RESULTS: On average, 303 IVF units responded to each survey, representing, on average, 231,000 annual IVF cycles. Most respondents in 2019 initiated LPS on the day of, or the day after egg collection (48.7 % and 36.3 %, respectively). In 2018, 72 % of respondents administered LPS for 8-10 gestational weeks, while in 2019, 65 % continued LPS until 10-12 weeks. Vaginal progesterone is the predominant delivery route; its utilization rose from 64 % of cycles in 2009 to 74.1 % in 2019. Oral P use has remained negligible; a slight increase to 2.9 % in 2019 likely reflects dydrogesterone's introduction into practice. E2 and GnRH agonists are rarely used for LPS, as is hCG alone, limited by its associated risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). CONCLUSIONS: Our Assisted reproductive technology (ART)-community survey series gave us insights into physician views on using progesterone for LPS. Despite extensive research and numerous publications, evidence quality and recommendation levels are surprisingly low for most topics. Clinical guidelines use mostly low-quality evidence. There is no single accepted LPS protocol. Our study highlights the gaps between science and practice and the need for further LPS research, with an emphasis on treatment individualization.

Effect of endometrial thickness changes on clinical pregnancy rates after progesterone administration in a single frozen-thawed euploid blastocyst transfer cycle using natural cycles with luteal support for PGT-SR- and PGT-M-assisted reproduction: a retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: To investigate whether the endometrial thickness change ratio from the progesterone administration day to the blastocyst transfer day is associated with pregnancy outcomes in a single frozen-thawed euploid blastocyst transfer cycle. METHODS: All patients used natural cycles with luteal support for endometrial preparation and selected a single euploid blastocyst for transfer after a biopsy for preimplantation genetic testing. The endometrial thickness was measured by transvaginal ultrasound on the progesterone administration day and the transfer day, the change in endometrial thickness was measured, and the endometrial thickness change ratio was calculated. According to the change rate of endometrial thickness, the patients were divided into three groups: the endometrial thickness compaction group, endometrial thickness non-change group and endometrial thickness expansion group. Among them, the endometrial thickness non-change and expansion groups were combined into the endometrial thickness noncompaction group. RESULTS: Ultrasound images of the endometrium in 219 frozen-thawed euploid blastocyst transfer cycles were evaluated. The clinical pregnancy rate increased with the increase in endometrial thickness change ratio, while the miscarriage rate and live birth rate were comparable among the groups. The multiple logistic regression results showed that in the fully adjusted model a higher endometrial thickness change ratio (per 10%) was associated with a higher clinical pregnancy rate (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.29; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.01-1.64; P = .040). Similarly, when the patients were divided into three groups according to the change rate of endometrial thickness, the endometrial thickness noncompaction group had a significant positive effect on the clinical pregnancy rate compared with the endometrial thickness compaction group after adjusting for all covariates. CONCLUSIONS: In frozen-thawed euploid blastocyst transfer cycles in which the endometrium was prepared by natural cycles with luteal support, the clinical pregnancy rate was higher in cycles without endometrial compaction after progesterone administration.

Luteal Phase Ovarian Stimulation versus Follicular Phase Ovarian Stimulation results in different Human Cumulus cell genes expression: A pilot study.

Background: Luteal-phase ovarian stimulation (LPOS) is an alternative in vitro fertilization (IVF) protocol. However, limited data showed the genes expression of cumulus cells (CCs) in LPOS. Therefore, this study aimed to investigate CC genes expression between LPOS and follicular-phase ovarian stimulation (FPOS) in poor ovarian responders (PORs) undergoing IVF cycles. Methods: This was a prospective non-randomized trial (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03238833). A total of 36 PORs who met the Bologna criteria and underwent IVF cycles were enrolled. Fifteen PORs were allocated to the LPOS group, and 21 PORs were allocated to the FPOS group. The levels of CC genes involved in inflammation (CXCL1, CXCL3, TNF, PTGES), oxidative phosphorylation (NDUFB7, NDUFA4L2, SLC25A27), apoptosis (DAPK3, BCL6B) and metabolism (PCK1, LDHC) were analyzed using real-time quantitative PCR and compared between the two groups. Results: The number of retrieved oocytes, metaphase II oocytes, fertilized oocytes, day-3 embryos and top-quality day-3 embryos, clinical pregnancy rates and live birth rates were similar between the two groups except for significantly high progesterone levels in the LPOS group. The mRNA expression levels of CXCL1 (0.51 vs 1.00, p < 0.001) and PTGES (0.30 vs 1.00, p < 0.01) were significantly lower in the LPOS group than in the FPOS group. The LPOS group had significantly lower mRNA expression of NDUFB7 (0.12 vs 1.00, p < 0.001) and NDUFA4L2 (0.33 vs 1.00, p < 0.01) than the FPOS group. DAPK3 (3.81 vs 1.00, p < 0.05) and BCL6B (2.59 vs 1.00, p < 0.01) mRNA expression was significantly higher in the LPOS group than in the FPOS group. Increased expression of PCK1 (3.13 vs. 1.00, p < 0.001) and decreased expression of LDHC (0.12 vs. 1.00, p < 0.001) were observed in the LPOS group compared to the FPOS group. Conclusions: Our data revealed different CC genes expression involving in inflammation, oxidative phosphorylation, apoptosis and metabolism between LPOS and FPOS in PORs. However, the results are non-conclusive; further large-scale randomized controlled trials are needed to validate the results.

DuoStim cycles potentially boost reproductive outcomes in poor prognosis patients.

AIM: To evaluate the overall performance and oocyte quality of follicular phase stimulation (FPS) vs. luteal phase stimulation (LPS) among patients undergoing double ovarian stimulation (DuoStim). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Observational retrospective two-center cohort study including 79 infertile women who underwent a total of 87 DuoStim cycles between January 2017 and May 2019. Besides assessing baseline characteristics in order to determine the patients' clinical profile, we analyzed the FPS and LPS regarding the total dose of gonadotropin received, the duration of stimulation, the number and maturity of oocytes, fertilization and blastocyst formation rates, and the number of blastocysts obtained. RESULTS: The patients' baseline characteristics were compatible with a diminished ovarian reserve and poor reproductive prognosis. While the luteal phase needed longer stimulation (12 days (5-19) vs. 11 (7-16), p < .001) and slightly higher gonadotropin doses (2946 ± 890 IU vs. 2550 ± 970 IU, p < .001), no significant differences were detected in the oocyte maturity, fertilization, and blastocyst formation rates. However, the number of oocytes retrieved (5 (0-16) vs. 4 (0-15), p = .006), mature oocytes (4 (0-15) vs. 3 (0-11), p = .032), and blastocysts obtained (70 vs. 53) were substantially greater after LPS. CONCLUSIONS: The DuoStim strategy in poor prognosis patients increases the number of oocytes and blastocysts available. Moreover, the number of oocytes and blastocysts obtained are higher after LPS when compared to FPS. Thus, it should be considered for selected patients in order to not only improve reproductive outcomes but also shorten the time to pregnancy.

Early-Pregnancy Dydrogesterone Supplementation Mimicking Luteal-Phase Support in ART Patients Did Not Provoke Major Reproductive Disorders in Pregnant Mice and Their Progeny.

Progestogens are frequently administered during early pregnancy to patients undergoing assisted reproductive techniques (ART) to overcome progesterone deficits following ART procedures. Orally administered dydrogesterone (DG) shows equal efficacy to other progestogens with a higher level of patient compliance. However, potential harmful effects of DG on critical pregnancy processes and on the health of the progeny are not yet completely ruled out. We treated pregnant mice with DG in the mode, duration, and doses comparable to ART patients. Subsequently, we studied DG effects on embryo implantation, placental and fetal growth, fetal-maternal circulation, fetal survival, and the uterine immune status. After birth of in utero DG-exposed progeny, we assessed their sex ratios, weight gain, and reproductive performance. Early-pregnancy DG administration did not interfere with placental and fetal development, fetal-maternal circulation, or fetal survival, and provoked only minor changes in the uterine immune compartment. DG-exposed offspring grew normally, were fertile, and showed no reproductive abnormalities with the exception of an altered spermiogram in male progeny. Notably, DG shifted the sex ratio in favor of female progeny. Even though our data may be reassuring for the use of DG in ART patients, the detrimental effects on spermatogenesis in mice warrants further investigations and may be a reason for caution for routine DG supplementation in early pregnancy.

Intramuscular injection of human chorionic gonadotropin prior to secretory transformation in patients undergoing frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles.

BACKGROUND: The major difference between a natural cycle and an artificially prepared cycle is the lack of luteinizing hormone (LH) peak in the latter. The LH/hCG receptors were identified to express in human endometrium and evidences of experiments also suggested the beneficial role of hCG in embryo implantation, indicating that the LH peak might be of clinical significance and the activation of LH/hCG receptors in the endometrium could improve embryo implantation. Hence, we postulated that the addition of hCG prior to secretory transformation in an artificial cycle might improve pregnancy outcomes. METHODS: This retrospective cohort study was conducted at a Reproductive Medicine Center between 2016 and 2018. Patients aged ≤43 years at the (index) oocyte retrieval and undergoing artificially prepared frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) with at least one good-quality embryo transferred were included. The cycles were divided into two groups: The hCG group (n = 337) received an intramuscular injection of 10,000 IU hCG before secretory transformation; the control group (n = 364) performed FET without hCG administration. The primary endpoint was live birth delivery rate (LBR), secondary outcomes included implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rate (CPR) and ongoing pregnancy rate (OPR). RESULTS: The LBR (49.9% vs 39.6%, P < 0.01), CPR (61.4% vs 50.5%, P < 0.01) and OPR (52.8% vs 43.1%, P < 0.05) were statistically significantly higher in the hCG group than the control group. The superiority in LBR after hCG administration remained significant after adjusting for confounding factors (OR 1.613, 95% CI 1.173-2.217; P < 0.01). In the subgroup analysis, the improvement in LBR was statistically significant after hCG administration for cleavage-stage embryo transfer cycles (51.2% vs 42.3%, P < 0.05), whereas for blastocyst transfer cycles, the improvement in LBR was not (45.7% vs 31.3%, P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Intramuscular hCG injection prior to secretory transformation may benefit LBR in patients undergoing artificially prepared FET cycles. But it should be noted that nonsignificant tendency towards higher LBR was observed after hCG administration in patients undergoing blastocyst transfer. So, future prospective randomized controlled studies are required to confirm, especially for blastocyst transfer cycles.

The best execution of the DuoStim strategy (double stimulation in the follicular and luteal phase of the same ovarian cycle) in patients who are poor ovarian responders.

BACKGROUND: Patients found to be poor ovarian responders (POR) are a challenging patient population for any assisted reproduction technology. Despite attempts at various controlled ovarian stimulation schemes, reproductive outcomes in this patient population have not improved. In recent years, the DuoStim protocol (both follicular and luteal phase stimulation during the same menstrual cycle) has shown a potential for use in patients with POR. METHODS: This retrospective study reviewed the medical records of 304 women who were diagnosed as POR and underwent the DuoStim protocol. We compared follicular phase stimulation (FPS) data and luteal phase stimulation (LPS) data of the same patients. We also compared the effects of different trigger drugs including urine human chorionic gonadotropin (uHCG; 10,000 IU), recombinant human chorionic gonadotropin (rHCG; 250 µg), and gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a; 0.2 mg) at the FPS and LPS stages. RESULTS: POR undergoing the DuoStim protocol resulted in a significantly higher number of oocytes retrieved, normal fertilised oocytes, cleaved embryos, cryopreserved embryos, and good quality embryos at the LPS stage than at the FPS stage. Trigger drugs at the FPS stage did not affect the FPS stage data. Regardless of the stage, rHCG and GnRH-a yielded significantly more cryopreserved embryos and good quality embryos than uHCG. CONCLUSION: The use of GnRH-a or rHCG as the trigger drug may be better than uHCG in both the FPS and LPS stages for POR undergoing the DuoStim protocol. This will increase the number of good quality embryos at the LPS stage. We found that the LPS stage results in more oocytes (and therefore more embryos) than the FPS stage.

Androstadienone resulted in a rightward shift of women's preference for sexually dimorphic male faces across the continuum of femininity-masculinity.

As a derivative of testosterone, androstadienone (AND) can influence human psychological and physiological states. To explore the influence of AND on women's preferences for male sexual dimorphic faces in a mate-choice context, we asked 52 females in the luteal phase to choose one from four sexual dimorphic male faces in a long-term and short-term context while inhaling 250 µm of AND or a placebo odor on two consecutive days. Results revealed that participants had a greater and lesser preference for the +30% masculinized and 60% feminized faces, respectively, while inhaling AND, as compared to when inhaling the placebo. The AND intervention resulted in a rightward shift of the women's preference for male sexual dimorphic faces across the continuum of femininity-masculinity. The current findings highlight that AND may influence women's preference for male sexually dimorphic faces in a mate-choice context.

Vaginal versus intramuscular progesterone for luteal phase support in assisted reproductive techniques: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

We aimed to compare the efficacy of vaginal progesterone versus intramuscular progesterone (IMP) for luteal phase support in assisted reproductive techniques (ART). A comprehensive electronic search of four electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and ISI Web of Science) was performed from inception till August 2019 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We included studies performed different ART with the use of vaginal progesterone versus IMP for luteal phase support. Our primary outcome was clinical pregnancy rate. Our secondary outcomes were ongoing pregnancy, miscarriage, live birth rates, and satisfaction in both groups. 15 RCTs met our inclusion criteria with a total of 5656 patients. Our analysis indicated no significant differences between vaginal progesterone and IMP regarding clinical and ongoing pregnancies (RR = 0.90, 95% CI [0.80, 1.00], p = .06), (RR = 0.90, 95% CI [0.76, 1.06], p = .21), respectively. No significant differences were found between both routes of progesterone in miscarriage (p = .98) and live birth (p = .99). Subgroup analysis between fresh and frozen embryo transfer cycles in above outcomes showed no difference between progesterone routes. Vaginal progesterone was significantly associated with more satisfaction compared to IMP (p < .00001). In conclusion, vaginal progesterone can be used an alternative method for luteal phase support instead of IMP in ART.

A Phase III randomized controlled trial of oral dydrogesterone versus intravaginal progesterone gel for luteal phase support in in vitro fertilization (Lotus II): results from the Chinese mainland subpopulation.

Lotus II, a randomized, open-label, multicenter, international study compared the efficacy and safety of oral dydrogesterone versus micronized vaginal progesterone (MVP) gel for luteal support in IVF. A prespecified subgroup analysis was performed on 239 Chinese mainland subjects from the overall study population (n = 1034), who were randomized to oral dydrogesterone 30 mg or 8% MVP gel 90 mg daily from the day of oocyte retrieval until 12 weeks of gestation. The aim was to demonstrate non-inferiority of oral dydrogesterone to MVP gel, assessed by the presence of a fetal heartbeat at 12 weeks of gestation. In the Chinese mainland subpopulation, there was a numerical difference of 9.4% in favor of oral dydrogesterone, with ongoing pregnancy rates at 12 weeks of gestation of 61.4% and 51.9% in the oral dydrogesterone and MVP gel groups, respectively (adjusted difference, 9.4%; 95% CI: -3.4 to 22.1); in the overall population, these were 38.7% and 35%, respectively (adjusted difference, 3.7%; 95% CI: -2.3 to 9.7). In both the Chinese mainland subpopulation and the overall population, dydrogesterone had similar efficacy and safety to MVP gel. With convenient oral administration, dydrogesterone has potential to transform luteal support treatment.

Effect of Gonadotrophin-Releasing Hormone Agonist Addition for Luteal Support on Pregnancy Outcome in vitro Fertilization/Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection Cycles: A Meta-Analysis Based on Randomized Controlled Trials.

PURPOSE: The meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effect of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) addition for luteal support on pregnancy outcome in vitro fertilization (IVF)/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles. METHODS: Meta-analysis. RESULTS: A total of 3,584 cycles were identified from 13 randomized controlled trials. The cumulative analysis showed that GnRH-a addition for luteal supports significantly improved live birth rate (relative risk [RR] = 1.52; 95% CI 1.20-1.94; p = 0.0006), the clinical pregnancy rate (RR 1.21; 95% CI 1.11-1.33; p < 0.0001), ongoing pregnancy rate (RR 1.18; 95% CI 1.06-1.32; p = 0.004), pregnancy rate (RR 1.36; 95% CI 1.01-1.82; p = 0.04), implantation rate (RR 1.44; 95% CI 1.17-1.77; p = 0.0007), and multiple pregnancy rate (RR 1.40; 95% CI 1.04-1.88; p = 0.03) in comparison with control, but not for the incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (RR 0.96; 95% CI 0.32-2.89; p = 0.94). We also found that GnRH-a addition for luteal support had a tendency to decrease the abortion rate (RR 0.72; 95% CI 0.56-0.93; p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the current meta-analysis showed a substantial efficacy of GnRH-a addition for luteal support on pregnancy outcomes in women undergoing IVF/ICSI and support the use of GnRH-a in luteal phase to improve the success of IVF/ICSI.

Combined use of oestradiol and progesterone to support luteal phase in antagonist intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles of normoresponder women: a case-control study.

We evaluated the effect of combined use of oral oestrogen (E2) and vaginal progesterone (P) to support luteal phase in antagonist intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles. We analysed data from 176 patients who underwent ICSI cycles with antagonist protocol. P 90 mg vaginal gel once a day and micronised E2 of 4 mg/day, were started from the day of oocyte pick up and continued to the 12th day of embryo transfer. Group 1 (n = 79) patients received E2 + P for luteal phase support. In group 2 (n = 97) patients, only P 90 mg vaginal gel was used for luteal phase support. There were no significant differences between group 1 and group 2 patients in terms of clinical pregnancy rates (PRs) (26.58% vs. 20.62%, p = .352), early pregnancy loss rates (6.33% vs. 6.19%, p = .969), incidence of luteal vaginal bleeding (8.86% vs. 8.25%, p = .885) and implantation rates (22.8% vs. 16.9%, p = .298). In conclusion, our study showed no beneficial effect of addition of E2 to luteal phase support on clinical PR in antagonist IVF cycles.Impact statementWhat is already known on this subject? Luteal phase deficiency is defined as a disruption in progesterone and oestrogen production after ovulation. It is clear that, luteal phase supplementation to improve the outcomes in in vitro fertilisation (IVF) cycles is mandatory. As an iatrogenic complication of assisted reproductive technique, decreased luteal oestrogen and progesterone levels lead to decreased pregnancy rates (PRs) and implantation rates.What the results of this study add? In this study, we aimed to present the role of luteal phase oestrogen administration in GnRH antagonist cycles. A total of 176 cases received progesterone vaginal gel form for luteal phase support. Study group received 4 mg oral oestradiol hemihydrate in addition to progesterone. Compared to previous studies, our study consisted of larger number of patients and we used oestradiol through oral route. We found out that luteal oestradiol support did not improve the clinical PR.What the implications are of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? Our study showed no beneficial effect of addition of oestradiol to luteal phase support on clinical PR in antagonist IVF cycles.

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

The aim of this study was to assess Gonadotropin Releasing Hormone agonist (GnRHa) trigger results of fresh in vitro fertilisation (IVF), Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection (ICSI) cycles in high-responder patients. Thirty-six high-responder patients, undergoing GnRH antagonist protocol combined with GnRHa trigger for final oocyte maturation, were included. All cycles were autologous fresh transfer cycles. Fifteen of 36 patients had previous IVF/ICSI cycles triggered with human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) and both cycles of these patients were compared. The mean fertilisation rate, blastocyst development and clinical pregnancy rates were 67%, 44.4% and 44.4%, respectively. The hCG and GnRHa trigger cycles of the same patients were compared as two groups (n: 15). 2PN oocyte counts were significantly higher in agonist trigger cycles (p .048). There were no differences in terms of M2 oocyte count and fertilisation rate. The blastocyst formation and clinical pregnancy rates for hCG and GnRHa trigger cycles were 33.3-66.7% and 13.3-46.7%, respectively. These results were found to be 2-fold and 3.5-fold higher, but not statistically significant. GnRHa trigger in combination with LPS is a good option for final oocyte maturation due to its good pregnancy outcomes and virtually eliminating OHSS risks.IMPACT STATEMENTWhat is already known on this subject? Gonadotrophin releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) trigger is effective in the induction of oocyte maturation and prevention of Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome (OHSS) on IVF cycles using antagonist protocol.What do the results of this study add? The main strength of this study is the comparison of different triggers in different cycles of the same patients. GnRHa trigger in combination with Luteal Phase Support (LPS) is a good option for final oocyte maturation due to its good pregnancy outcomes and virtually eliminating OHSS risks.What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? We suppose that GnRHa trigger combined with modified LPS is clinically more successful than Human Chorionic Gonadotropin (hCG) in regard to OHSS prevention and reproductive outcomes on fresh IVF/ICSI cycles. More extensive studies are needed to draw firm conclusions.

Luteal granulosa cells from natural cycles are more capable of maintaining their viability, steroidogenic activity and LH receptor expression than those of stimulated IVF cycles.

STUDY QUESTION: Are there any differences in the molecular characteristics of the luteal granulosa cells (GC) obtained from stimulated versus non-stimulated (natural) IVF cycles that may help explain the defective luteal phase in the former? SUMMARY ANSWER: Luteal GC of stimulated IVF cycles, particularly those of agonist-triggered antagonist cycles, are less viable ex vivo, express LH receptor and anti-apoptotic genes at lower levels, undergo apoptosis earlier and fail to maintain their estradiol (E2) and progesterone (P4) production in comparison to natural cycle GC. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Luteal function is defective in stimulated IVF cycles, which necessitates P4 and/or hCG administration (known as luteal phase support) in order to improve clinical pregnancy rates and prevent miscarriage. The luteal phase becomes shorter and menstruation begins earlier than a natural cycle if a pregnancy cannot be achieved, indicative of early demise of corpus luteum (premature luteolysis). Supra-physiological levels of steroids produced by multiple corpora luteae in the stimulated IVF cycles are believed to inhibit LH release directly via negative feedback actions on the hypothalamic-pituitary-ovarian axis resulting in low circulating levels of LH and a defective luteal phase. We hypothesized that some defects in the viability and steroidogenic activity of the luteal GC of the stimulated IVF cycles might contribute to this defective luteal phase in comparison to natural cycle GC. This issue has not been studied in human before. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A comparative translational research study of ex vivo and in vitro models of luteal GC recovered from IVF patients undergoing natural versus stimulated IVF cycles was carried out. Luteinized GC were obtained from 154 IVF patients undergoing either natural (n = 22) or stimulated IVF cycles with recombinant FSH and GnRH agonist (long) (n = 44), or antagonist protocol triggered conventionally either with recombinant hCG (n = 46) or with a GnRH agonist (n = 42). GC were maintained in vitro for up to 6 days. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Cellular viability (YO-PRO-1 staining), the expression of the steroidogenic enzymes, pro-apoptotic genes [Bcl-2-associated death promoter (BAD), Bcl-2-associated X protein (BAX) and Caspase-3 (CASP3)], anti-apoptotic genes [RAC-alpha serine/threonine-protein kinase (AKT-1) and Bcl-2-like protein 2 (BCL2-L2)], LH receptor, vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) (using real-time quantitative PCR at mRNA level and western blot immunoprecipitation assay at protein level) and in vitro E2 and P4 production (electrochemiluminescence immunoassay) were compared in GC among the groups. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Natural cycle GC were significantly more viable ex vivo (88%) compared to their counterparts of the stimulated IVF cycles (66, 64 and 37% for agonist and antagonist cycles triggered with hCG and GnRH agonist respectively, P < 0.01). They were also more capable of maintaining their vitality in culture compared to their counterparts from the stimulated IVF cycles: at the end of the 6-day culture period, 74% of the cells were still viable whereas only 48, 43 and 22% of the cells from the agonist and antagonist cycles triggered with hCG and agonist respectively, were viable (P < 0.01). The mRNA expression of anti-apoptotic genes (AKT-1 and BCL2-L2) was significantly lower, while that of pro-apoptotic genes (BAD, BAX and CASP3) was significantly higher in the stimulated cycles, particularly in the agonist-triggered antagonist cycles, compared to natural cycle GC (P < 0.01 for long protocol and antagonist hCG trigger, P < 0.001 for agonist trigger). The expression of steroidogenic enzymes (stAR, SCC, 3ß-HSD and aromatase) and VEGF was significantly higher in the agonist and hCG-triggered antagonist cycles compared to natural cycle GC. Therefore, in vitro E2 and P4 production in cells from the stimulated IVF cycles was significantly higher than their counterparts obtained from the natural cycles in the first 2 days of culture. However, after Day 2, their viability and hormone production began to decline very rapidly with the most drastic decrease being observed in the agonist-triggered cycles. By contrast, natural cycle GC maintained their viability and produced E2 and P4 in increasing amounts in culture up to 6 days. In vitro P production and the mRNA and protein expression of LH receptor, VEGF and 3ß-HSD were most defective in the agonist-triggered antagonist cycles compared to natural and agonist and hCG-triggered antagonist cycles. In vitro hCG treatment of a subset of the cells from the agonist-triggered cycles improved their viability, increased E2 and P4 production in vitro and up-regulated the mRNA expression of anti-apoptotic gene BCL-L2 together with steroidogenic enzymes stAR, SCC, 3B-HSD, LH receptor and VEGF. LARGE SCALE DATA: Not applicable. LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: The limitations include analysis of luteinized GC only might not reflect the in vivo mechanisms involved in survival and function of the whole corpus luteum; GC recovered during oocyte retrieval belong to a very early stage of the luteal phase and might not be representative; effects of ovulation triggered with hCG may not equate to the endogenous LH trigger; the clinical characteristics of the patients may vary among the different groups and it was not possible to correlate stimulation-related molecular alterations in luteal GC with the clinical outcome, as no oocytes have been utilized yet. Therefore, our findings do not conclusively rule out the possibility that some other mechanisms in vivo may also account for defective luteal function observed in stimulated IVF cycles. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: Ovarian stimulation is associated with significant alterations in the viability and steroidogenic activity of luteal GC depending on the stimulation protocol and mode of ovulation trigger. Reduced survival and down-regulated expression of 3B-HSD, LH receptor and VEGF leading to compromised steroid production in stimulated cycles, and particularly in the agonist-triggered cycles, may at least in part help explain why the luteal phase is defective and requires exogenous support in these cycles. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): This study was funded by the School of Medicine, the Graduate School of Health Sciences of Koc University and Koç University Research Center for Translational Medicine (KUTTAM), equally funded by the Republic of Turkey Ministry of Development Research Infrastructure Support Program. All authors declare no conflict of interest.

GnRH agonists to sustain the luteal phase in antagonist IVF cycles: a randomized prospective trial.

BACKGROUND: The addition of a GnRH analogue to the luteal phase in in vitro fertilization programs has been seldom proposed due to the presence of GnRH receptors in the endometrium. The aim of the study was to evaluate the effect of triptorelin addition in short antagonist cycles, compared to cycles where the only supplementation was progesterone. METHODS: The primary objective of this study was the study of the effect of Triptorelin addiction during the luteal phase on the live birth rate. Secondary objectives of efficacy were pregnancy rates and implantation rates, as well as safety in terms of OHSS risks. The study was a prospective, randomized, open study, performed in two independent Centers from July 2013 to October 2015. Patients were divided into three groups: a) Regular antagonist protocol, with only luteal progesterone; b) Antagonist protocol with luteal triptorelin as multiple injections, c) Antagonist protocol with luteal triptorelin as single bolus. Descriptive statistics were obtained for all the parameters. Mean and standard deviation were used for all quantitative parameters. Differences between percentages were studied using Chi-square test generalized to the comparison of several proportions. RESULTS: A total number of 1344 patients completed the study, 786 under the age of 35 years, and 558 over 35 years. It was observed an increase of positive HCG results, Clinical pregnancy rates and Delivery rates when triptorelin was added in the luteal phase, irrespective whether as a single bolus or five injections. This increase was statistically significant both for pregnancy rates and delivery rates. The statistic difference between pregnancies and deliveries obtained with or without luteal triptorelin reached p < 0,01. No increase of OHSS risk was observed. CONCLUSIONS: From this large study it appears that the concept of luteal phase supplementation should be revisited. From our study it appears that triptorelin addition to the luteal phase of antagonist cycles, either as a single bolus or using multiple injections, is a good tool to optimize ART results. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was approved by the Ethics Committee of Provincia di Bergamo (n 1203/2013).