Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
A randomized, non-inferiority trial on the DuoStim strategy in PGT-A cycles.
Cerrillo, M; Cecchino, G N; Toribio, M; García-Rubio, M J; García-Velasco, J A.
Affiliation
  • Cerrillo M; IVIRMA Madrid, Madrid 28023, Spain. Electronic address: Maria.Cerrillo@ivirma.com.
  • Cecchino GN; Department of Reproductive Medicine, Mater Prime, São Paulo-SP, Brazil.
  • Toribio M; IVIRMA Madrid, Madrid 28023, Spain.
  • García-Rubio MJ; IVIRMA Madrid, Madrid 28023, Spain.
  • García-Velasco JA; IVIRMA Madrid, Madrid 28023, Spain; Department of Gynecology and Obstetrics, Rey Juan Carlos University, Madrid, Spain; IVI Foundation, Instituto de Investigación Sanitaria La Fe (IIS La Fe), Valencia, Spain.
Reprod Biomed Online ; 46(3): 536-542, 2023 03.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36567150
ABSTRACT
RESEARCH QUESTION Is the DuoStim strategy an effective alternative to two conventional ovarian stimulation cycles in poor-prognosis patients undergoing preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies (PGT-A) to improve euploidy rates and obtain the first euploid embryo in less time?

DESIGN:

This randomized controlled trial was performed at IVI Madrid between June 2017 and December 2020 and included 80 patients with a suboptimal profile aged 38 or older undergoing PGT-A cycles. Patients were blindly randomized into two groups 39 women underwent two ovarian stimulations in consecutive cycles (control group), whereas the double stimulation strategy was applied to 41 women (DuoStim group). The main outcome was the euploidy rate in each group. The secondary outcomes were the time it took to obtain a euploid embryo and the main cycle outcomes.

RESULTS:

The baseline characteristics of the patients were similar. No differences were found between the control group and the DuoStim group in the mean days of stimulation (21.3 ± 1.6 versus 23.0 ± 1.4, P = 0.10), total gonadotrophins (4005 ± 450 versus 4245 ± 430, P = 0.43), metaphase II oocytes (8.7 ± 1.8 versus 6.8 ± 1.7, P = 0.15) or euploid embryos obtained (0.8 ± 0.4 versus 0.6 ± 0.4, P = 0.45). The euploid rate per randomized patient (ITT) was 16.1% in the control group versus 22.7% in the DuoStim group, with P-values of 0.371, and the euploidy rate per patient treated was 39.0% versus 45.7% in the control versus DuoStim groups. However, there was a significant difference in the average number of days it took to obtain a euploid blastocyst, favouring the DuoStim group (44.1 ± 2.0 versus 23.3 ± 2.8, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS:

The use of the DuoStim strategy in poor-prognosis patients undergoing PGT-A cycles maintains a similar euploidy rate while reducing the time required to obtain a euploid blastocyst.
Subject(s)
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Genetic Testing / Preimplantation Diagnosis Type of study: Clinical_trials / Prognostic_studies Limits: Female / Humans / Pregnancy Language: En Journal: Reprod Biomed Online Journal subject: MEDICINA REPRODUTIVA Year: 2023 Type: Article

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Genetic Testing / Preimplantation Diagnosis Type of study: Clinical_trials / Prognostic_studies Limits: Female / Humans / Pregnancy Language: En Journal: Reprod Biomed Online Journal subject: MEDICINA REPRODUTIVA Year: 2023 Type: Article