Treatment with ganirelix effectively prevents premature LH rises, luteinization in subjects undergoing stimulated IUI. Low-dose rFSH regimen combined with a GnRH antagonist may be an alternative treatment option for subjects with previous proven luteinization or in subjects who would otherwise require insemination when staff are not working.

A 5-day free interval after OCP or progestogen offers the advantages of gonadotrophin recovery and homogeneous follicular cohort, whereas early FSH rebound occurring after estrogen pre-treatment argues for a short free period.

STUDY QUESTION How does a history of dramatic weight loss linked to bariatric surgery impact IVF outcomes? SUMMARY ANSWER Women with a history of bariatric surgery who had undergone IVF had a comparable cumulative live birth rate (CLBR) to non-operated patients of the same BMI after the first IVF cycle. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY In the current context of increasing prevalence of obesity in women of reproductive age, weight loss induced by bariatric surgery has been shown to improve spontaneous fertility in obese women. However, little is known on the clinical benefit of bariatric surgery in obese infertile women undergoing IVF. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION This exploratory retrospective multicenter cohort study was conducted in 10 287 IVF/ICSI cycles performed between 2012 and 2016. We compared the outcome of the first IVF cycle in women with a history of bariatric surgery to two age-matched groups composed of non-operated women matched on the post-operative BMI of cases, and non-operated severely obese women. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS The three exposure groups of age-matched women undergoing their first IVF cycle were compared: Group 1: 83 women with a history of bariatric surgery (exposure, mean BMI 28.9 kg/m2); Group 2: 166 non-operated women (non-exposed to bariatric surgery, mean BMI = 28.8 kg/m2) with a similar BMI to Group 1 at the time of IVF treatment; and Group 3: 83 non-operated severely obese women (non-exposed to bariatric surgery, mean BMI = 37.7 kg/m2). The main outcome measure was the CLBR. Secondary outcomes were the number of mature oocytes retrieved and embryos obtained, implantation and miscarriage rates, live birth rate per transfer as well as birthweight. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE No significant difference in CLBR between the operated Group 1 patients and the two non-operated Groups 2 and 3 was observed (22.9%, 25.9%, and 12.0%, in Groups 1, 2 and 3, respectively). No significant difference in average number of mature oocytes and embryos obtained was observed among the three groups. The implantation rates were not different between Groups 1 and 2 (13.8% versus 13.7%), and although lower (6.9%) in obese women of Group 3, this difference was not statistically significant. Miscarriage rates in Groups 1, 2 and 3 were 38.7%, 35.8% and 56.5%, respectively (P = 0.256). Live birth rate per transfer in obese patients was significantly lower compared to the other two groups (20%, 18%, 9.3%, respectively, in Groups 1, 2 and 3, P = 0.0167). Multivariate analysis revealed that a 1-unit lower BMI increased the chances of live birth by 9%. In operated women, a significantly smaller weight for gestational age was observed in newborns of Group 1 compared to Group 3 (P = 0.04). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION This study was conducted in France and nearly all patients were Caucasian, questioning the generalizability of the results in other countries and ethnicities. Moreover, 950 women per group would be needed to achieve a properly powered study in order to detect a significant improvement in live birth rate after bariatric surgery as compared to infertile obese women. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS These data fuel the debate on the importance of pluridisciplinary care of infertile obese women, and advocate for further discussion on whether bariatric surgery should be proposed in severely obese infertile women before IVF. However, in light of the present results, infertile women with a history of bariatric surgery can be reassured that surgery-induced dramatic weight loss has no significant impact on IVF prognosis. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S) This work was supported by unrestricted grants from FINOX—Gédéon Richter and FERRING Pharmaceuticals awarded to the ART center of the Clinique Mathilde to fund the data collection and the statistical analysis. There are no conflicts of interest to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER NCT02884258

This study was designed to compare both the effectiveness and safety of two low-dose gonadotrophin regimens (step-up versus sequential step-up and step-down) for ovulation induction in polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS) patients. In all, 56 infertile clomiphene citrate-resistant PCOS patients were included in this prospective randomized study. A total of 38 cycles were conducted with a classic step-up protocol, whereas for 35 cycles the follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) threshold dose was reduced by half when the leading follicle reached 14 mm in diameter (sequential protocol). Serum oestradiol, progesterone and luteinizing hormone concentrations and follicular growth rate were evaluated during the cycle. At the time of human chorionic gonadotrophin administration, cycles treated with sequential protocol exhibited significantly lower oestradiol concentrations [434 +/- 45 versus 593 +/- 67 pg/ml (mean +/- SEM)] and the number of medium-sized (14-15 mm) follicles was significantly reduced (0.3 +/- 0.1 versus 0.8 +/- 0.2) compared with cycles treated with the classic step-up protocol. Moreover, in these cycles serum luteal oestradiol concentrations were decreased significantly (350 +/- 77 versus 657 +/- 104 pg/ ml) compared with the classic step-up protocol. A sequential step-up and step-down protocol seems to be a safe and effective regimen for ovulation induction in PCOS patients. Decreasing the FSH dose following step-up follicular selection may be an alternative method to avoid multifollicular development.

The impact of patient-physician communication and levels of understanding of treatment on patient knowledge and compliance has been studied in patients undergoing their first cycle of infertility treatment. This observational, real-life, longitudinal study involved 488 patients from 28 infertility centres in France. Data on communication quality, understanding of treatment instructions, patient knowledge and compliance to treatment protocol were collected through questionnaires administered before treatment initiation (V1) and at oocyte retrieval (V2). At V1, patients were very satisfied with their levels of understanding of the injection and monitoring schedules, the information given by the medical team, and the way of receiving instructions, with average ratings on a scale of 0-100% of N 75%. They rated their understanding of possible treatment side-effects as satisfactory (average score 71.1%). Gaps in patient knowledge about their treatment, revealed by discrepancies between physician and patient reports, were observed in 20.5% of patients (n = 79/386), and most commonly resulted from confusion about the units and dose of gonadotropin. Anxiety about performing self-injections and a lack of confidence in their ability to self-inject correctly were each observed in approximately one-third of patients. Patient self-assessment of compliance at V2 revealed that 27% of patients (n = 83/305) did not comply with or had doubts about the injection schedule or dose injected. Meanwhile physicians reported high levels of patient