ObjectiveThis study aimed to examine the efficacy of HRT with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) pre-treatment in women with male-factor infertility who underwent a frozen embryo transfer (FET) programme.DesignBetween January 2016 and October 2020, 2733 women with male-factor infertility who underwent the HRT protocol as the endometrial preparation method were enrolled at two Reproductive Medicine Centres. Patients were divided into two groups based on whether they had GnRH-a pre-treatment before HRTs: the GnRHa-HRT group and the HRT group. The inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) method was conducted to balance patient baseline characteristics between treatment cohorts to reduce selection bias. The live birth rate was considered regarded as the primary pregnancy outcome.ResultsMultivariate logistic regression adjusted for confounding factors, the GnRHa-HRT group showed a notably higher rate of live birth (OR 2.154, 95% CI 1.636~2.835, P<0.001) when compared to the HRT group. Additionally, the rate of miscarriage was significantly lower in the GnRHa-HRT group. The GnRHa-HRT group had significantly higher rates of biochemical pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, multiple pregnancy, and term birth.ConclusionThe endometrial preparation protocol of HRT with GnRH-a pre-treatment could obviously increase the live birth rate for women with male-factor infertility undergoing the FET programme.
ObjectiveTo examine the efficacy of gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist (GnRH-ant) protocol and the long GnRH agonist (GnRH-a) protocol during in vitro fertilization (IVF) therapy in patients with severe male infertile factors.MethodsA total of 983 women with severe male factor infertility undergoing IVF therapy from 2017 to 2020 at one center were retrospectively analyzed. Patients were divided into the GnRH-ant group (n=527) and the GnRH-a group (n=456) according to their ovarian stimulation protocols. Patient baseline characteristics, ovarian stimulation characteristics, and clinical pregnancy outcomes were compared between the groups. The live birth rate was considered the main pregnancy outcome.ResultsGnRH-a group had a higher live birth rate compared with the GnRH-ant group (41.0% versus 31.3%, p=0.002). Moreover, the implantation (32.8% vs. 28.1%, p=0.033), biochemical pregnancy (52.4% versus 44.8%, p=0.017), clinical pregnancy (49.3% versus 39.7%, p=0.002) and ongoing pregnancy rates (43.2% vs. 34.9%, p=0.008) were higher in GnRH-a group. For patients with one embryo transferred, the GnRH-a group demonstrated higher live birth (37.0% vs. 19.4%, p=0.010) and ongoing pregnancy rate (38.9% vs. 24.5%, p=0.046) than the GnRH-ant group. Among patients with two embryos transferred, the live birth rate was also higher in the GnRH-a group than in the GnRH-ant group, with no statistical difference. No significant differences were observed in the biochemical abortion rate, clinical miscarriage rate, early miscarriage rate, late miscarriage rate, heterotopic pregnancy rate, twin pregnancy rate, and birth sex ratio between the two groups.ConclusionFor individuals with severe male infertility undergoing IVF, the GnRH-a protocol is considered a more efficient and feasible strategy with a higher live birth rate compared to the GnRH-ant protocol, especially in single embryo transfer.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.