<p>Comparison Between PPOS and GnRHa-Long Protocol in Clinical Outcome with the First IVF/ICSI Cycle: A Randomized Clinical Trial</p>

Abstract

Purpose: To investigate whether progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) can be an alternative as gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) long protocol for infertile women with normal ovarian reserve during IVF/ICSI. Methods: A prospective randomized controlled trial (RCT) including 257 patients was conducted between 1 August 2017 to 1 January 2018. Computerized randomization was performed to assign participants into two treatment groups at a 1:1 ratio: PPOS (130 patients) or GnRHa long protocol (127 patients) followed by their first IVF/ICSI with fresh/frozen embryo transfer. The primary outcome was the number of oocytes retrieved. Patients with normal ovarian reserve undergoing their first IVF/ICSI procedure were included. The embryological and clinical outcomes were measured. Only the first embryo transfer cycle was followed-up. Results: Basic characteristics such as infertility duration, age, and body mass index (BMI) were comparable in both groups. No significant difference was found in the number (mean ± SD) oocytes retrieved [11.8 ± 6.5 for PPOS vs 11.3 ± 5.6 for GnRHa long protocol] or viable embryos [4.5 ± 3.0 for PPOS vs 4.2 ± 2.9 for GnRHa long protocol] between the groups. No patient from either group experienced a premature LH surge during the whole process of ovarian stimulation. Besides, there was no moderate or severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome during the ovarian stimulation in PPOS group while three patients suffered it in the GnRHa long protocol group. There was no significant difference in the clinical pregnancy rate of the first embryos transfer cycle between the two groups. Conclusion: PPOS in combination with embryo cryopreservation as an ovarian stimulation regimen was as effective as GnRHa long protocol during controlled ovarian stimulation (COH) under different endocrinal mechanisms. It can also achieve comparable embryological and clinical outcomes while reducing the incidence of moderate and severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) and HMG dosage. It can be an alternative of the treatments for infertile patients with normal ovarian reserve undergoing IVF as well as traditional protocols.

Meta‐analysis of the embryo freezing transfer interval

“…There are a number of recommendations regarding the management of cycles with frozen/thawed embryos, regarding endometrial preparation, progesterone supplementation, cycle monitoring, and implantation window assessment 52‐56 . Nonetheless, there is no agreement concerning the usefulness of delaying ET.…”

Comparison of Cumulative Live Birth Rates Per Aspiration IVF/ICSI Cycle Between GnRH Antagonist Protocol and Progesterone-Primed Ovarian Stimulation Protocol for Infertility With Normal Ovarian Reserve: A Randomised Controlled Trial

“…In the current study, similar oocyte yields, metaphase II oocyte numbers, implantation rates, and clinical pregnancy rates were obtained in the PPOS and GnRH-ant groups. Several studies have also noted similar embryonic and pregnancy outcomes (e.g., oocyte and embryo quality) for PPOS and ovarian stimulation protocols other than GnRH-ant [19,20]. Moreover, there have been no differences in miscarriage rates or the euploidy rates of blastocysts between PPOS and GnRH-ant protocols [21].…”

Validating the Use of Corifollitropin Alfa in Progestin-Primed Ovarian Stimulation Protocol on Normal and High Responders by Comparing with Conventional Antagonist Protocol: A Retrospective Study

“…Not only the incidence of OHSS, but also the duration and dose of HMG stimulation were significantly higher in the long protocol group than those in the MPA-PPOS group. No significant difference was found in the number of oocytes retrieved and viable embryos as well as clinical pregnancy rate between PPOS and long protocols [37]. As for another progestogen, a retrospective study on patients with polycystic ovarian syndrome displayed a significant higher fertilization rate, viable embryo rate, and clinical pregnancy rate in utrogestan-PPOS group as compared to those receiving a short protocol under similar HMG consumption between groups [17].…”