Leuprolide acetate was used in 189 in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles. Patients were allocated prospectively into two groups: In group A (96 cycles), leuprolide acetate was started on the 2nd menstrual cycle day of the actual IVF attempt. In group B (93 cycles), leuprolide acetate was started on the 3rd luteal phase day of the preceding IVF cycle. Ovulation was induced with a combination of pure follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) and human menopausal gonadotropins (hMG), starting on or before the 5th cycle day, respectively. Leuprolide acetate and gonadotropins were continued until the day of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) administration. Follicular aspiration was carried out either by laparoscopy or by transvaginal ultrasound guidance. Group A required a lower number of FSH and hMG ampules than group B; nevertheless, there was no difference in the number of follicles, percentage of preovulatory oocytes or fertilization rate between the groups. The number of embryos transferred was 3.3 and 3.4, respectively. A significantly higher pregnancy rate was observed in group A (40.6% versus 27.7%) and a lower miscarriage rate (22.8% versus 36%) than in group B. In short, this study suggests that there is no need to administer leuprolide acetate routinely during the luteal phase of the preceding IVF cycle.

In those clinical situations in which an immediate and profound suppression of gonadotrophins is desired, LHRH agonists have the disadvantage of producing an initial stimulatory effect on hormone secretion. Therefore, the use of GnRH antagonists which cause an immediate and dose-related inhibition of LH and FSH by competitive blockade of the receptors is much more advantageous. One of the most advanced antagonist produced to date is Cetrorelix, a decapeptide which has been shown to be safe and effective in inhibiting LH and sex-steroid secretion in a variety of animal species and in clinical studies as well. Clinical trials in patients suffering from advanced carcinoma of the prostate, benign prostate hyperplasia, and ovarian cancer are currently in progress and have already shown the usefulness of this new treatment modality. In particular, the concept that a complete suppression of sex-steroids may not be necessary in indications such as uterine fibroma, endometriosis and benign prostatic hyperplasia represents a promising novel perspective for treatment of these diseases. Following completion of phase III trials in controlled ovarian stimulation for IVF regimens, Cetrorelix was given marketing approval and, thus, became the first LHRH antagonist available clinically.

In the GnRH-antagonist multiple-dose protocol, the LH level retrieved from a single measurement during ovarian stimulation and concomitant GnRH-antagonist administration can vary according to [1] the time point of sampling with respect to the GnRH-antagonist injection and [2] episodic changes in circulating LH concentration due to the pulsatile release of LH from the pituitary gland. To exemplify the size of pharmacodynamic effect of a single 0.25-mg cetrorelix administration on LH concentration profile and pulsatility, we measured endogenous LH levels every 15 minutes from 8 hours before the first cetrorelix administration until 24 hours thereafter on ovarian stimulation day 6 and 7 in a single patient.

To compare the efficacy of the long GnRH agonist vs. the short GnRH agonist vs. the GnRH antagonist regimens in poor responders undergoing IVF.Randomized controlled trial.Tertiary referral fertility units.Women with previous poor ovarian response undergoing IVF.One hundred eleven women were randomized to the long GnRH agonist, short agonist, and antagonist regimens.The primary outcome was the number of oocytes retrieved. Secondary outcome measures were gonadotropin consumption, duration of stimulation, cycle cancellation rate, mature oocytes retrieved, fertilization rate, cycles reaching ET, and clinical and ongoing pregnancy rates.Number of oocytes retrieved was significantly higher with long GnRH agonist compared with the short agonist regimen (4.42 ± 3.06 vs. 2.71 ± 1.60), while there was no significant difference between long agonist and antagonist regimens (4.42 ± 3.06 vs. 3.30 ± 2.91). Duration of stimulation and total gonadotropin dose were significantly higher with long agonist compared with short agonist and antagonist regimens. The ongoing pregnancy rate was 8.1% with long and short agonist regimens and 16.2% with the antagonist regimen.Long GnRH agonist and antagonist regimens offer a suitable choice for poor responders, whereas the short agonist regimen may be less effective because of fewer eggs retrieved.Copyright © 2014 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

The gonadotropin-releasing hormone-agonist (GnRH-a) treatment during in vitro fertilization (IVF) sometimes causes a functional ovarian cyst during the administration period before gonadotropin stimulation, as an undesired event. The aim of this study was to analyze the effect of these cysts on the IVF outcomes.Out of 981 IVF cycles, 78 with ovarian cysts were retrospectively analyzed with respect to the demographic characteristics, hormonal outcomes, and fertilization, implantation and clinical pregnancy rates.The metaphase II oocyte ratio, fertilization rate and percentage of high quality embryos (grade 1) were significantly higher in the cyst-negative group (p<0.0001; p<0.0001; p≤0.05). These same three parameters were also significantly higher in the cyst-aspirated group (p<0.01; p<0.05; p<0.05). Cyst diameters of the aspiration group were significantly higher (p<0.05). No statistically significant differences in implantation and clinical pregnancy rates were determined between the groups.An ovarian cyst formation during the GnRH-a suppression period negatively affects oocyte quality. Cyst aspiration before gonadotropin stimulation does not improve the IVF outcome.

Can a consensus and evidence-driven set of terms and definitions be generated to be used globally in order to ensure consistency when reporting on infertility issues and fertility care interventions, as well as to harmonize communication among the medical and scientific communities, policy-makers, and lay public including individuals and couples experiencing fertility problems?A set of 283 consensus-based and evidence-driven terminologies used in infertility and fertility care has been generated through an inclusive consensus-based process with multiple stakeholders.In 2006 the International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies (ICMART) published a first glossary of 53 terms and definitions. In 2009 ICMART together with WHO published a revised version expanded to 87 terms, which defined infertility as a disease of the reproductive system, and increased standardization of fertility treatment terminology. Since 2009, limitations were identified in several areas and enhancements were suggested for the glossary, especially concerning male factor, demography, epidemiology and public health issues.Twenty-five professionals, from all parts of the world and representing their expertise in a variety of sub-specialties, were organized into five working groups: clinical definitions; outcome measurements; embryology laboratory; clinical and laboratory andrology; and epidemiology and public health. Assessment for revisions, as well as expansion on topics not covered by the previous glossary, were undertaken. A larger group of independent experts and representatives from collaborating organizations further discussed and assisted in refining all terms and definitions.Members of the working groups and glossary co-ordinators interacted through electronic mail and face-to-face in international/regional conferences. Two formal meetings were held in Geneva, Switzerland, with a final consensus meeting including independent experts as well as observers and representatives of international/regional scientific and patient organizations.A consensus-based and evidence-driven set of 283 terminologies used in infertility and fertility care was generated to harmonize communication among health professionals and scientists as well as the lay public, patients and policy makers. Definitions such as 'fertility care' and 'fertility awareness' together with terminologies used in embryology and andrology have been introduced in the glossary for the first time. Furthermore, the definition of 'infertility' has been expanded in order to cover a wider spectrum of conditions affecting the capacity of individuals and couples to reproduce. The definition of infertility remains as a disease characterized by the failure to establish a clinical pregnancy; however, it also acknowledges that the failure to become pregnant does not always result from a disease, and therefore introduces the concept of an impairment of function which can lead to a disability. Additionally, subfertility is now redundant, being replaced by the term infertility so as to standardize the definition and avoid confusion.All stakeholders agreed to the vast majority of terminologies included in this glossary. In cases where disagreements were not resolved, the final decision was reached after a vote, defined before the meeting as consensus if passed with 75%. Over the following months, an external expert group, which included representatives from non-governmental organizations, reviewed and provided final feedback on the glossary.Some terminologies have different definitions, depending on the area of medicine, for example demographic or clinical as well as geographic differences. These differences were taken into account and this glossary represents a multinational effort to harmonize terminologies that should be used worldwide.None.N/A.Copyright © 2017 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

To assess the available evidence comparing effectiveness of ovarian stimulation (OS) using clomiphene citrate (CC) and/or letrozole (LTZ) to reduce follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) consumption compared with standard OS.We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials that compared reproductive outcomes following in-vitro fertilization. We searched 11 electronic databases and hand-searched the reference lists of included studies and related reviews. We stratified the results, separating studies according to the oral agent used (CC or LTZ) and the characteristics of the included women (expected poor ovarian response or other women). When combining the results of the included studies, we assessed the relative risk (RR) for live birth, clinical pregnancy, miscarriage and cycle cancelation, the Peto odds ratio (OR) for ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) and mean difference (MD) for the number of oocytes retrieved and FSH consumption.A total of 22 studies were included in the review. Considering women with expected poor ovarian response, the available evidence suggested that using CC to reduce FSH consumption during OS provided similar rates of live birth (RR, 0.9 (95% CI, 0.6-1.2), moderate-quality evidence) and clinical pregnancy (RR, 1.0 (95% CI, 0.8-1.4), moderate-quality evidence); the use of LTZ did not cause a relevant change in the number of oocytes retrieved (MD, -0.4 (95% CI, -0.9 to 0.1), high-quality evidence). Considering the studies evaluating other women, the available evidence suggested that using CC to reduce FSH consumption during OS reduced the number of oocytes retrieved (MD, -4.6 (95% CI, -6.1 to -3.0), high-quality evidence) and risk of OHSS (Peto OR, 0.2 (95% CI, 0.1-0.3), moderate-quality evidence), while results were similar for rates of live birth (RR, 0.9 (95% CI, 0.7-1.1), moderate-quality evidence) and clinical pregnancy (RR, 1.0 (95% CI, 0.8-1.1), high-quality evidence). The quality of the evidence was low or very low for other outcomes.The use of CC to reduce FSH consumption in women with expected poor ovarian response has the advantage of providing similar reproductive outcomes with reduced costs. For the other women, the use of CC for reducing FSH consumption has the additional advantage of reducing OHSS, but also reduces the total number of oocytes retrieved. More studies are needed to evaluate the effect of LTZ for the same purpose. Future studies should focus on cumulative pregnancy per oocyte retrieval, patient dissatisfaction and agreement to repeat the cycle if not pregnant, which are important outcomes for clinical decisions. Copyright © 2017 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.Copyright © 2017 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd.

To investigate the use of medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) to prevent LH surge during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) and to compare cycle characteristics and pregnancy outcomes in subsequently frozen-thawed ET (FET) cycles.A prospective controlled study.Tertiary-care academic medical center.Three hundred patients undergoing IVF/intracytoplasmic sperm injection treatment.In the study group, hMG and MPA were administered simultaneously beginning on cycle day 3. Ovulation was induced with a GnRH agonist or cotriggered by a GnRH agonist and hCG when dominant follicles matured. A short protocol was used in the control group. Viable embryos were cryopreserved for later transfer in both protocols.The primary outcome measure was the number of oocytes retrieved. Secondary outcomes included the number of mature oocytes, the incidence of premature LH surge, and clinical pregnancy outcomes from FETs.The number of oocytes retrieved in the study group was similar to those in the controls (9.9 ± 6.7 vs. 9.0 ± 6.0), and higher doses of hMG were administered. In the study group, LH suppression persisted during ovarian stimulation, and the incidence of premature LH surge was 0.7% (1/150). No statistically significant differences were found in the clinical pregnancy rates (47.8% vs. 43.3%), implantation rates (31.9% vs. 27.7%), and live-birth rates (42.6% vs. 35.5%) in the study group and controls.The results show that MPA is an effective oral alternative for the prevention of premature LH surge in woman undergoing COH. This finding will help establish a new regimen for ovarian stimulation in combination with embryo cryopreservation.ChiCTR-ONRC-14004419.Copyright © 2015 American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

What is the recommended management for couples presenting with unexplained infertility (UI), based on the best available evidence in the literature?

In vitro fertilization (IVF) and embryo transfer and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) have allowed millions of infertile couples to achieve pregnancy. As an essential part of IVF/ICSI enabling the retrieval of a high number of oocytes in one cycle, controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) treatment mainly composes of the standard long gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) protocol and the gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH-ant) protocol. However, the effectiveness of GnRH-ant protocol is still debated because of inconsistent conclusions and insufficient subgroup analyses. This systematic review and meta-analysis included a total of 52 studies, encompassing 5193 participants in the GnRH-ant group and 4757 in the GnRH-a group. The findings of this study revealed that the GnRH-ant protocol is comparable with the long GnRH-a protocol when considering live birth as the primary outcome, and it is a favourable protocol with evidence reducing the incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome in women undergoing IVF/ICSI, especially in women with polycystic ovary syndrome. Further research is needed to compare the subsequent cumulative live birth rate between the two protocols among the general and poor ovarian response patients since those patients have a lower clinical pregnancy rate, fewer oocytes retrieved or fewer high-grade embryos in the GnRH-ant protocol.

Several GnRH antagonist protocols are currently used during COS in the context of ART treatments; however, questions remain regarding whether these protocols are comparable in terms of efficacy and safety.A systematic review followed by a pairwise and network meta-analyses were performed. The systematic review and pairwise meta-analysis of direct comparative data according to the PRISMA guidelines evaluated the effectiveness of different GnRH antagonist protocols (fixed Day 5/6 versus flexible, ganirelix versus cetrorelix, with or without hormonal pretreatment) on the probability of live birth and ongoing pregnancy after COS during ART treatment. A frequentist network meta-analysis combining direct and indirect comparisons (using the long GnRH agonist protocol as the comparator) was also performed to enhance the precision of the estimates.The systematic literature search was performed using Embase (Ovid), MEDLINE (Ovid), Cochrane Central Register of Trials (CENTRAL), SCOPUS and Web of Science (WOS), from inception until 23 November 2021. The search terms comprised three different MeSH terms that should be present in the identified studies: GnRH antagonist; assisted reproduction treatment; randomized controlled trial (RCT). Only studies published in English were included.The search strategy resulted in 6738 individual publications, of which 102 were included in the systematic review (corresponding to 75 unique studies) and 73 were included in the meta-analysis. Most studies were of low quality. One study compared a flexible protocol with a fixed Day 5 protocol and the remaining RCTs with a fixed Day 6 protocol. There was a lack of data regarding live birth when comparing the flexible and fixed GnRH antagonist protocols or cetrorelix and ganirelix. No significant difference in live birth rate was observed between the different pretreatment regimens versus no pretreatment or between the different pretreatment protocols. A flexible GnRH antagonist protocol resulted in a significantly lower OPR compared with a fixed Day 5/6 protocol (relative risk (RR) 0.76, 95% CI 0.62 to 0.94, I2 = 0%; 6 RCTs; n = 907 participants; low certainty evidence). There were insufficient data for a comparison of cetrorelix and ganirelix for OPR. OCP pretreatment was associated with a lower OPR compared with no pretreatment intervention (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.69 to 0.92; I2 = 0%; 5 RCTs, n = 1318 participants; low certainty evidence). Furthermore, in the network meta-analysis, a fixed protocol with OCP resulted in a significantly lower OPR than a fixed protocol with no pretreatment (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.71 to 0.99; moderate quality evidence). The surface under the cumulative ranking (SUCRA) scores suggested that the fixed protocol with no pretreatment is the antagonist protocol most likely (84%) to result in the highest OPR. There was insufficient evidence of a difference between fixed/flexible or OCP pretreatment/no pretreatment interventions regarding other outcomes, such as ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome and miscarriage rates.Available evidence, mostly of low quality and certainty, suggests that different antagonist protocols should not be considered as equivalent for clinical decision-making. More trials are required to assess the comparative effectiveness of ganirelix versus cetrorelix, the effect of different pretreatment interventions (e.g. progestins or oestradiol) or the effect of different criteria for initiation of the antagonist in the flexible protocol. Furthermore, more studies are required examining the optimal GnRH antagonist protocol in women with high or low response to ovarian stimulation.© The Author(s) 2023. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology.