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.

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.

Maternal vaccination against COVID-19 and neonatal outcomes during Omicron: INTERCOVID-2022 study.

BACKGROUND: In early 2023, when Omicron was the variant of concern, we showed that vaccinating pregnant women decreased the risk for severe COVID-19-related complications and maternal morbidity and mortality. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to analyze the impact of COVID-19 during pregnancy on newborns and the effects of maternal COVID-19 vaccination on neonatal outcomes when Omicron was the variant of concern. STUDY DESIGN: INTERCOVID-2022 was a large, prospective, observational study, conducted in 40 hospitals across 18 countries, from November 27, 2021 (the day after the World Health Organization declared Omicron the variant of concern) to June 30, 2022, to assess the effect of COVID-19 in pregnancy on maternal and neonatal outcomes and to assess vaccine effectiveness. Women diagnosed with laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 during pregnancy were compared with 2 nondiagnosed, unmatched women recruited concomitantly and consecutively during pregnancy or at delivery. Mother-newborn dyads were followed until hospital discharge. The primary outcomes were a neonatal positive test for COVID-19, severe neonatal morbidity index, severe perinatal morbidity and mortality index, preterm birth, neonatal death, referral to neonatal intensive care unit, and diseases during the neonatal period. Vaccine effectiveness was estimated with adjustment for maternal risk profile. RESULTS: We enrolled 4707 neonates born to 1577 (33.5%) mothers diagnosed with COVID-19 and 3130 (66.5%) nondiagnosed mothers. Among the diagnosed mothers, 642 (40.7%) were not vaccinated, 147 (9.3%) were partially vaccinated, 551 (34.9%) were completely vaccinated, and 237 (15.0%) also had a booster vaccine. Neonates of booster-vaccinated mothers had less than half (relative risk, 0.46; 95% confidence interval, 0.23-0.91) the risk of being diagnosed with COVID-19 when compared with those of unvaccinated mothers; they also had the lowest rates of preterm birth, medically indicated preterm birth, respiratory distress syndrome, and number of days in the neonatal intensive care unit. Newborns of unvaccinated mothers had double the risk for neonatal death (relative risk, 2.06; 95% confidence interval, 1.06-4.00) when compared with those of nondiagnosed mothers. Vaccination was not associated with any congenital malformations. Although all vaccines provided protection against neonatal test positivity, newborns of booster-vaccinated mothers had the highest vaccine effectiveness (64%; 95% confidence interval, 10%-86%). Vaccine effectiveness was not as high for messenger RNA vaccines only. Vaccine effectiveness against moderate or severe neonatal outcomes was much lower, namely 13% in the booster-vaccinated group (all vaccines) and 25% and 28% in the completely and booster-vaccinated groups, respectively (messenger RNA vaccines only). Vaccines were fairly effective in protecting neonates when given to pregnant women ≤100 days (14 weeks) before birth; thereafter, the risk increased and was much higher after 200 days (29 weeks). Finally, none of the neonatal practices studied, including skin-to-skin contact and direct breastfeeding, increased the risk for infecting newborns. CONCLUSION: When Omicron was the variant of concern, newborns of unvaccinated mothers had an increased risk for neonatal death. Neonates of vaccinated mothers had a decreased risk for preterm birth and adverse neonatal outcomes. Because the protective effect of COVID-19 vaccination decreases with time, to ensure that newborns are maximally protected against COVID-19, mothers should receive a vaccine or booster dose no more than 14 weeks before the expected date of delivery.

Risk factors associated with stillbirth and adverse perinatal outcomes in dichorionic twin pregnancies complicated by selective fetal growth restriction: a cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: The main aim of this study was to investigate the perinatal outcomes of dichorionic twin pregnancies complicated by selective fetal growth restriction (sFGR). DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Tertiary reference centre. POPULATION: Dichorionic twin pregnancies complicated by sFGR between 2000 and 2019 in St George's University Hospital. METHODS: Regression analyses were performed using generalised linear models and mixed-effects generalised linear models where appropriate to account for pregnancy level dependency in variables. Time to event analyses were performed with mixed-effects Cox regression models. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Stillbirth, neonatal death or neonatal unit admission with morbidity in one or both twins. RESULTS: A total of 102 (of 2431 dichorionic twin pregnancies) pregnancies complicated by sFGR were included in the study. The Cochrane-Armitage test revealed a significant trend for increased adverse perinatal outcome rates with more severe forms of umbilical artery flow impedance, i.e. reversed, absent, positive with resistant flow and positive flow without resistance. A multivariable model including maternal and conception characteristics had poor predictive accuracy for stillbirth (area under the curve: 0.68, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.55-0.81) and composite adverse perinatal outcomes (area under the curve: 0.58, 95% CI 0.47-0.70). When umbilical artery Doppler parameters were added to the models, the area under the curve values improved to 0.95 (95% CI 0.89-0.99) and 0.83 (95% CI 0.73-0.92) for stillbirth and composite adverse perinatal outcomes, respectively. CONCLUSION: In dichorionic twin pregnancies complicated by sFGR, the umbilical artery Z-scores were associated with both intrauterine death and adverse perinatal outcomes.

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.

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.

Maternal haemodynamics in Hypertensive Disorders of Pregnancy under antihypertensive therapy (HyperDiP): study protocol for a prospective observational case-control study.

INTRODUCTION: Hypertensive disorders of pregnancy (HDP) are associated with a high incidence of maternal and perinatal morbidity and mortality. HDP, in particular pre-eclampsia, have been determined as risk factors for future cardiovascular disease. Recently, the common hypothesis of pre-eclampsia being a placental disorder was challenged as numerous studies show evidence for short-term and long-term cardiovascular changes in pregnancies affected by HDP, suggesting a cardiovascular origin of the disease. Despite new insights into the pathophysiology of HDP, concepts of therapy remain unchanged and evidence for improved maternal and neonatal outcome by using antihypertensive agents is lacking. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A prospective observational case-control study, including 100 women with HDP and 100 healthy controls, which will assess maternal haemodynamics using the USCOM 1A Monitor and Arteriograph along with cardiovascular markers (soluble fms-like kinase 1/placental-like growth factor, N-terminal pro-B type natriuretic peptide) in women with HDP under antihypertensive therapy, including a follow-up at 3 months and 1 year post partum, will be conducted over a 50-month period in Vienna. A prospective, longitudinal study of cardiovascular surrogate markers conducted in Oslo will serve as a comparative cohort for the Vienna cohort of haemodynamic parameters in pregnancy including a longer follow-up period of up to 3 years post partum. Each site will provide a dataset of a patient group and a control group and will be assessed for the outcome categories USCOM 1A measurements, Arteriograph measurements and Angiogenic marker measurements. To estimate the effect of antihypertensive therapy on outcome parameters, ORs with 95% CIs will be computed. Longitudinal changes of outcome parameters will be compared between normotensive and hypertensive pregnancies using mixed-effects models. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been granted to all participating centres. Results will be published in international peer-reviewed journals and will be presented at national and international conferences.

Impact of point-of-care ultrasound and routine third trimester ultrasound on undiagnosed breech presentation and perinatal outcomes: An observational multicentre cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Accurate knowledge of fetal presentation at term is vital for optimal antenatal and intrapartum care. The primary objective was to compare the impact of routine third trimester ultrasound or point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) with standard antenatal care, on the incidence of overall and proportion of all term breech presentations that were undiagnosed at term, and on the related adverse perinatal outcomes. METHODS AND FINDINGS: This was a retrospective multicentre cohort study where we included data from St. George's (SGH) and Norfolk and Norwich University Hospitals (NNUH). Pregnancies were grouped according to whether they received routine third trimester scan (SGH) or POCUS (NNUH). Women with multiple pregnancy, preterm birth prior to 37 weeks, congenital abnormality, and those undergoing planned cesarean section for breech presentation were excluded. Undiagnosed breech presentation was defined as follows: (a) women presenting in labour or with ruptured membranes at term subsequently discovered to have a breech presentation; and (b) women attending for induction of labour at term found to have a breech presentation before induction. The primary outcome was the proportion of all term breech presentations that were undiagnosed. The secondary outcomes included mode of birth, gestational age at birth, birth weight, incidence of emergency cesarean section, and the following neonatal adverse outcomes: Apgar score <7 at 5 minutes, unexpected neonatal unit (NNU) admission, hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy (HIE), and perinatal mortality (including stillbirths and early neonatal deaths). We employed a Bayesian approach using informative priors from a previous similar study; updating their estimates (prior) with our own data (likelihood). The association of undiagnosed breech presentation at birth with adverse perinatal outcomes was analyzed with Bayesian log-binomial regression models. All analyses were conducted using R for Statistical Software (v.4.2.0). Before and after the implementation of routine third trimester scan or POCUS, there were 16,777 and 7,351 births in SGH and 5,119 and 4,575 in NNUH, respectively. The rate of breech presentation in labour was consistent across all groups (3% to 4%). In the SGH cohort, the percentage of all term breech presentations that were undiagnosed was 14.2% (82/578) before (years 2016 to 2020) and 2.8% (7/251) after (year 2020 to 2021) the implementation of universal screening (p < 0.001). Similarly, in the NNUH cohort, the percentage of all term breech presentations that were undiagnosed was 16.2% (27/167) before (year 2015) and 3.5% (5/142) after (year 2020 to 2021) the implementation of universal POCUS screening (p < 0.001). Bayesian regression analysis with informative priors showed that the rate of undiagnosed breech was 71% lower after the implementation of universal ultrasound (RR, 0.29; 95% CrI 0.20, 0.38) with a posterior probability greater than 99.9%. Among the pregnancies with breech presentation, there was also a very high probability (>99.9%) of reduced rate of low Apgar score (<7) at 5 minutes by 77% (RR, 0.23; 95% CrI 0.14, 0.38). There was moderate to high probability (posterior probability: 89.5% and 85.1%, respectively) of a reduction of HIE (RR, 0.32; 95% CrI 0.0.05, 1.77) and extended perinatal mortality rates (RR, 0.21; 95% CrI 0.01, 3.00). Using informative priors, the proportion of all term breech presentations that were undiagnosed was 69% lower after the initiation of universal POCUS (RR, 0.31; 95% CrI 0.21, 0.45) with a posterior probability greater of 99.9%. There was also a very high probability (99.5%) of a reduced rate of low Apgar score (<7) at 5 minutes by 40% (RR, 0.60; 95% CrI 0.39, 0.88). We do not have reliable data on number of facility-based ultrasound scans via the standard antenatal referral pathway or external cephalic versions (ECVs) performed during the study period. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, we observed that both a policy of routine facility-based third trimester ultrasound or POCUS are associated with a reduction in the proportion of term breech presentations that were undiagnosed, with an improvement in neonatal outcomes. The findings from our study support the policy of third trimester ultrasound scan for fetal presentation. Future studies should focus on exploring the cost-effectiveness of POCUS for fetal presentation.

Effect of the endometrial thickness on the live birth rate: insights from 959 single euploid frozen embryo transfers without a cutoff for thickness.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate whether endometrial thickness (ET) independently affects the live birth rate (LBR) after embryo transfer. DESIGN: Retrospective study. SETTING: Private assisted reproductive technology center. PATIENT(S): A total of 959 single euploid frozen embryo transfers. INTERVENTION(S): Vitrified euploid blastocyst transfer. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Live birth rate per embryo transfer. RESULT(S): The conditional density plots did not demonstrate either a linear relationship between the ET and LBR or a threshold below which the LBR decreased perceivably. Receiver operating characteristic curve analyses did not suggest a predictive value of the ET for the LBR. The area under the curve values were 0.55, 0.54, and 0.54 in the overall, programmed, and natural cycle transfers, respectively. Logistic regression analyses with age, embryo quality, day of trophectoderm biopsy, body mass index, and ET did not suggest an independent effect of the ET on the LBR. CONCLUSION(S): We did not identify a threshold of the ET that either precluded live birth or under which the LBR decreases perceivably. Common practice of cancelling embryo transfers when the ET is <7 mm may not be justified. Prospective studies, in which the management of the transfer cycle would not be altered by ET, would provide higher-quality evidence on the subject.

Adverse maternal, fetal, and newborn outcomes among pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 infection: an individual participant data meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Despite a growing body of research on the risks of SARS-CoV-2 infection during pregnancy, there is continued controversy given heterogeneity in the quality and design of published studies. METHODS: We screened ongoing studies in our sequential, prospective meta-analysis. We pooled individual participant data to estimate the absolute and relative risk (RR) of adverse outcomes among pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 infection, compared with confirmed negative pregnancies. We evaluated the risk of bias using a modified Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. RESULTS: We screened 137 studies and included 12 studies in 12 countries involving 13 136 pregnant women.Pregnant women with SARS-CoV-2 infection-as compared with uninfected pregnant women-were at significantly increased risk of maternal mortality (10 studies; n=1490; RR 7.68, 95% CI 1.70 to 34.61); admission to intensive care unit (8 studies; n=6660; RR 3.81, 95% CI 2.03 to 7.17); receiving mechanical ventilation (7 studies; n=4887; RR 15.23, 95% CI 4.32 to 53.71); receiving any critical care (7 studies; n=4735; RR 5.48, 95% CI 2.57 to 11.72); and being diagnosed with pneumonia (6 studies; n=4573; RR 23.46, 95% CI 3.03 to 181.39) and thromboembolic disease (8 studies; n=5146; RR 5.50, 95% CI 1.12 to 27.12).Neonates born to women with SARS-CoV-2 infection were more likely to be admitted to a neonatal care unit after birth (7 studies; n=7637; RR 1.86, 95% CI 1.12 to 3.08); be born preterm (7 studies; n=6233; RR 1.71, 95% CI 1.28 to 2.29) or moderately preterm (7 studies; n=6071; RR 2.92, 95% CI 1.88 to 4.54); and to be born low birth weight (12 studies; n=11 930; RR 1.19, 95% CI 1.02 to 1.40). Infection was not linked to stillbirth. Studies were generally at low or moderate risk of bias. CONCLUSIONS: This analysis indicates that SARS-CoV-2 infection at any time during pregnancy increases the risk of maternal death, severe maternal morbidities and neonatal morbidity, but not stillbirth or intrauterine growth restriction. As more data become available, we will update these findings per the published protocol.

Clinical risk factors of adverse outcomes among women with COVID-19 in the pregnancy and postpartum period: a sequential, prospective meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This sequential, prospective meta-analysis sought to identify risk factors among pregnant and postpartum women with COVID-19 for adverse outcomes related to disease severity, maternal morbidities, neonatal mortality and morbidity, and adverse birth outcomes. DATA SOURCES: We prospectively invited study investigators to join the sequential, prospective meta-analysis via professional research networks beginning in March 2020. STUDY ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Eligible studies included those recruiting at least 25 consecutive cases of COVID-19 in pregnancy within a defined catchment area. METHODS: We included individual patient data from 21 participating studies. Data quality was assessed, and harmonized variables for risk factors and outcomes were constructed. Duplicate cases were removed. Pooled estimates for the absolute and relative risk of adverse outcomes comparing those with and without each risk factor were generated using a 2-stage meta-analysis. RESULTS: We collected data from 33 countries and territories, including 21,977 cases of SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnancy or postpartum. We found that women with comorbidities (preexisting diabetes mellitus, hypertension, cardiovascular disease) vs those without were at higher risk for COVID-19 severity and adverse pregnancy outcomes (fetal death, preterm birth, low birthweight). Participants with COVID-19 and HIV were 1.74 times (95% confidence interval, 1.12-2.71) more likely to be admitted to the intensive care unit. Pregnant women who were underweight before pregnancy were at higher risk of intensive care unit admission (relative risk, 5.53; 95% confidence interval, 2.27-13.44), ventilation (relative risk, 9.36; 95% confidence interval, 3.87-22.63), and pregnancy-related death (relative risk, 14.10; 95% confidence interval, 2.83-70.36). Prepregnancy obesity was also a risk factor for severe COVID-19 outcomes including intensive care unit admission (relative risk, 1.81; 95% confidence interval, 1.26-2.60), ventilation (relative risk, 2.05; 95% confidence interval, 1.20-3.51), any critical care (relative risk, 1.89; 95% confidence interval, 1.28-2.77), and pneumonia (relative risk, 1.66; 95% confidence interval, 1.18-2.33). Anemic pregnant women with COVID-19 also had increased risk of intensive care unit admission (relative risk, 1.63; 95% confidence interval, 1.25-2.11) and death (relative risk, 2.36; 95% confidence interval, 1.15-4.81). CONCLUSION: We found that pregnant women with comorbidities including diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and cardiovascular disease were at increased risk for severe COVID-19-related outcomes, maternal morbidities, and adverse birth outcomes. We also identified several less commonly known risk factors, including HIV infection, prepregnancy underweight, and anemia. Although pregnant women are already considered a high-risk population, special priority for prevention and treatment should be given to pregnant women with these additional risk factors.

Assessment of fetal growth in twins: Which method to use?

Fetal growth restriction contributes to the excess perinatal mortality and morbidity associated with twin pregnancies. Regular ultrasound monitoring for fetal growth restriction is an essential component of antenatal care of twin gestations. It is accepted that twins have divergent growth trajectories around 28-30 weeks' gestation and are born smaller compared to singletons. Despite this well-established difference in fetal growth, twin pregnancies have been traditionally managed using growth standards developed for singleton pregnancies. Numerous recent studies have demonstrated a strong case supporting the use of twin-specific growth standards, but clinical implementation has been lacking. In this paper, we will review the evidence on factors affecting fetal growth, the rationale for twin-specific reference charts, clinical evidence for their use, and future direction of research. Applying singleton growth standards to twin pregnancies inflates the abnormal growth rate, and recent clinical evidence from several studies suggests that they are too stringent for classification of twins. The association of adverse perinatal and maternal outcomes such as perinatal death, preterm birth, neonatal care unit admission, hypertensive disorders of pregnancy, and composite neonatal morbidity is stronger when classification is made using twin-specific standards compared to singletons.

Outcomes of a GnRH Agonist Trigger Following a GnRH Antagonist or Flexible Progestin-Primed Ovarian Stimulation Cycle.

A suggested explanation for the pituitary-suppressive effects of progestin-primed ovarian stimulation cycles (PPOS) is pituitary luteinizing hormone (LH) depletion with progestin exposure during the follicular phase. The GnRH agonist (GnRHa) trigger releases endogenous LH from the pituitary, and if the LH depletion theory is correct, the response to the agonist trigger would be dampened in PPOS cycles. In this study, we compared the performance of the GnRHa trigger after PPOS and GnRH antagonist ovarian stimulation cycles. All women who underwent ovarian stimulation with the GnRH antagonist or flexible PPOS (fPPOS) and received a GnRH agonist trigger were eligible for inclusion. Outcomes included number of metaphase-II (MII) oocytes retrieved per cycle, rates of empty follicle syndrome, maturation, fertilization, blastulation, and cumulative clinical pregnancy per stimulation cycle. During the screening period, there were 166 antagonists and 58 fPPOS cycles triggered with a GnRH agonist. Groups were matched for potential confounders using propensity score matching. Progestin-downregulated cycles had 19% high mature oocyte yield (median: 14 vs. 19 MII oocytes, P = 0.03). Cumulative ongoing pregnancy or live birth rates were estimated after matching for transferred embryo count, and rates were similar between GnRH antagonist and fPPOS group (57.0% vs. 62.1%, P = 0.68). However, the number of remaining blastocysts was higher in the fPPOS group (median: 5.0 vs. 6.0, P < 0.001). LH levels were higher in fPPOS cycles compared to GnRH antagonist cycles up to the trigger day (P < 0.001). After the GnRHa trigger, fPPOS cycles were associated with a steeper LH surge compared with antagonist cycles (P = 0.02). Higher endogenous gonadotropin levels through the stimulation period and an LH surge of higher magnitude following a GnRHa trigger suggest a milder pituitary suppression by fPPOS, which needs to be confirmed in larger samples. It appears that progestins do not deplete pituitary LH reserves and a GnRHa trigger is usable after PPOS in women with high ovarian reserve.

COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy.

Despite a recent endorsement from official and professional bodies unequivocally recommending COVID-19 vaccination, vaccine hesitancy among pregnant people remains high. The accumulated evidence demonstrates that pregnant people are a special risk group for COVID-19, with an increased risk of intensive care unit admission, extracorporeal membranous oxygenation requirement, preterm birth, and perinatal death. These risks are further increased with some variants of concern, and vaccination of pregnant people reduces the COVID-19-related increase in maternal or fetal morbidity. Data from more than 180,000 vaccinated persons show that immunization against COVID-19 with an mRNA vaccine is safe for pregnant people. Many observational studies comparing perinatal outcomes between vaccinated and unvaccinated pregnant people have had reassuring findings and did not demonstrate harmful effects on pregnancy or the newborn. Immunization with mRNA vaccines does not increase the risk of miscarriage, preterm delivery, low birthweight, maternal or neonatal intensive care unit admission, fetal death, fetal abnormality, or pulmonary embolism. Moreover, observational data corroborate the findings of randomized trials that mRNA vaccination is highly effective at preventing severe SARS-CoV-2 infection in pregnant people, emphasizing that the potential maternal and fetal benefits of vaccination greatly outweigh the potential risks of vaccination. Ensuring pregnant people have unrestricted access to COVID-19 vaccination should be a priority in every country worldwide.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the effectiveness and perinatal outcomes of COVID-19 vaccination in pregnancy.

Safety and effectiveness of COVID-19 vaccines during pregnancy is a particular concern affecting vaccination uptake by this vulnerable group. Here we evaluated evidence from 23 studies including 117,552 COVID-19 vaccinated pregnant people, almost exclusively with mRNA vaccines. We show that the effectiveness of mRNA vaccination against RT-PCR confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection 7 days after second dose was 89·5% (95% CI 69·0-96·4%, 18,828 vaccinated pregnant people, I2 = 73·9%). The risk of stillbirth was significantly lower in the vaccinated cohort by 15% (pooled OR 0·85; 95% CI 0·73-0·99, 66,067 vaccinated vs. 424,624 unvaccinated, I2 = 93·9%). There was no evidence of a higher risk of adverse outcomes including miscarriage, earlier gestation at birth, placental abruption, pulmonary embolism, postpartum haemorrhage, maternal death, intensive care unit admission, lower birthweight Z-score, or neonatal intensive care unit admission (p > 0.05 for all). COVID-19 mRNA vaccination in pregnancy appears to be safe and is associated with a reduction in stillbirth.

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.