Volume 16, Issue 8 (August 2018)                   IJRM 2018, 16(8): 535-540 | Back to browse issues page


XML Persian Abstract Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Shahrokh Tehrani Nejad E, Bakhtiari Ghaleh F, Eslami B, Haghollahi F, Bagheri M, Masoumi M. Comparison of pre-treatment with OCPs or estradiol valerate vs. no pre-treatment prior to GnRH antagonist used for IVF cycles: An RCT. IJRM. 2018; 16 (8) :535-540
URL: http://journals.ssu.ac.ir/ijrmnew/article-1-1180-en.html
1- Vali-Asr Reproductive Health Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran, Iran
2- Vali-Asr Reproductive Health Research Center, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran, Iran , bakhtiyari1355@gmail.com
3- Breast Disease Research Center (BDRC), Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran, Iran
4- Department of Reproductive Health, School of Nursing and Midwifery, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran., Iran
Abstract:   (144 Views)
Background: Both oral contraceptive pills (OCPs) and estradiol valerate (E2) have been used to schedule a gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles. Since the suppression of follicle-stimulating hormone by OCPs can stay 5-7 days after stopping the pills, it seems that starting the gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) after 6 days of pre-treatment discontinuation may be important in IVF outcomes.
Objective: The aim of the present study was to determine the number of mature oocyte and pregnancy rate of three pretreatment methods for fresh embryo transfer cycles.
Materials and Methods: In this randomized controlled trial, two-hundred ten women (18-35 yr and less than 2 previous IVF attempts) undergoing IVF with the GnRH antagonist protocol were randomized to the OCP, E2, and no pretreatment arms. OCP group (n=53) received OCP (ethinyl estradiol30 μg and levonorgestrel150 μg), E2 group (n=63) received 4 mg/day oral E2 (17β‐E2) for 10 days from day 20 of the previous cycle and GnRH antagonist stimulation was started 6 days after the interruption of OCP and E2. The control group (n =70) did not receive any pretreatment.
Results: No significant difference was observed in the mean number of the mature oocyte, endometrial thickness, and embryo quality. The pregnancy rate in E2 group was higher than the two other groups (42.9% vs 39.6% and 34.3% in OCP and control group, respectively), but the difference was not statistically significant (p=0.59).
Conclusion: It seems OCP or E2 pretreatment could not improve the fresh IVF-embryo transfer outcomes
Full-Text [PDF 510 kb]   (34 Downloads) |   |   Full-Text (HTML)  (9 Views)  
Type of Study: Short Research Reports |
Received: 2018/08/27 | Accepted: 2018/08/27 | Published: 2018/08/27

References
1. Frydman R, Forman R, Rainhorn JD, Belaisch-Allart J, Hazout A, Testart J. A new approach to follicular stimulation for in vitro fertilization: programmed oocyte retrieval. Fertil Steril 1986; 46: 657-662. [DOI:10.1016/S0015-0282(16)49644-5]
2. Wardle PG, Foster PA, Mitchell JD, McLaughlin EA, Williams JA, Corrigan E, et al. Norethisterone treatment to control timing of IVF cycle. Hum Reprod 1986; 1: 455-457. [DOI:10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a136454]
3. Zorn JR, Boyer P, Guichard A. Never on a Sunday: programming for IVF-ET and GIFT. Lancet 1987; 1: 385-386. [DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(87)91756-9]
4. Gerli S, Remohí J, Partrizio P, Borrero C, Balmaceda JP, Silber SJ, et al. Programming of ovarian stimulation with norethindrone acetate in IVF/GIFT cycles. Hum Reprod 1989; 4: 746-748. [DOI:10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a136977]
5. Griesinger G, Venetis CA, Marx T, Diedrich K, Tarlatzis BC, Kolibianakis ME. Oral contraceptive pill pretreatment in ovarian stimulation with GnRH antagonists for IVF: a systematic review and meta-analyses. Fert Steril 2008; 90: 1055-1063. [DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.07.1354]
6. Fanchin R, Cunha-Filho JS, Schonauer LM, Kadoch IJ, Cohen-Bacri P, Frydman R. Coordination of early antral follicles by luteal estradiol administration provides a basis for alternative controlled ovarian hyperstimulation regimens. Fertil Steril 2003; 79: 316-321. [DOI:10.1016/S0015-0282(02)04574-0]
7. Hauzman EE, Zapata A, Bermejo A, Iglesias C, Pellicer A, Garcia-Velasco JA. Cycle scheduling for in vitro fertilization with oral contraceptive pills versus oral estradiol valerate: a randomized, controlled trial. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2013; 11: 96-102. [DOI:10.1186/1477-7827-11-96]
8. Fanchin R, Salomon L, Castelo-Branco A, Olivennes F, Frydman N, Frydman R. Luteal estradiol pre-treatment coordinates folliclar growth during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation with antagonist. Hum Reprod 2003; 18: 2698-2703. [DOI:10.1093/humrep/deg516]
9. Racowsky C, Vernon M, Mayer J, Ball GD, Behr B, Pomeroy KO, et al. Standardization of grading embryo morphology. J Assist Reprod Genet 2010; 27: 437-439. [DOI:10.1007/s10815-010-9443-2]
10. Garcia-Velasco JA, Bermejo A, Ruiz F, Martinez-Salazar J, Requena A, Pellicer A. Cycle scheduling with oral contraceptive pills in the GnRH antagonist protocol vs. the long protocol: a randomized, controlled trial. Fertil Steril 2011; 96: 590-593. [DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.06.022]
11. Rombauts L, Healy D, Norman RJ; Orgalutran Scheduling Study Group. A comparative randomized trial to assess the impact of oral contraceptive pretreatment on follicular growth and hormone profiles in GnRH antagonist-treated patients. Hum Reprod 2006; 21: 95-103. [DOI:10.1093/humrep/dei302]
12. Kolibianakis EM, Papanikolaou EG, Camus M, Tournaye H, Van Steirteghem AC, Devroey P. Effect of oral contraceptive pill pretreatment on ongoing pregnancy rates in patients stimulated with GnRH antagonists and recombinant FSH for IVF: a randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod 2006; 21: 352-357. [DOI:10.1093/humrep/dei348]
13. Griesinger G, Kolibianakis EM, Venetis C, Diedrich K, Tarlatzis B. Oral contraceptive pretreatment significantly reduces ongoing pregnancy likelihood in gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist cycles: an updated meta-analysis. Fertil Steril 2010; 94: 2382-2384. [DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.04.025]
14. Kovacs P, Barg PE, Witt BR. Hypothalamic-pituitary suppression with oral contraceptive pills does not improve outcome in poor responder patients undergoing in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer cycles. J Assist Reprod Genet 2001; 18: 391-394. [DOI:10.1023/A:1016626607387]
15. Cédrin-Durnerin I, Guivarc'h-Levêque A, Hugues JN; Groupe d'Etude en Médecine et Endocrinologie de la Reproduction. Pretreatment with estrogen does not affect IVF-ICSI cycle outcome compared with no pretreatment in GnRH antagonist protocol: a prospective randomized trial. Fertil Steril 2012; 97: 1359-1364. [DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.02.028]
16. de Ziegler D, Jaaskelainen AS, Brioschi PA, Fanchin R, Bulletti C. Synchronization of endogenous and exogenous FSH stimuli in controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH). Hum Reprod 1998; 13: 561-564. [DOI:10.1093/humrep/13.3.561]
17. Shastri SM, Barbieri E, Kligman I, Schoyer KD, Davis OK, Rosenwaks Z. Stimulation of the young poor responder: comparison of the luteal estradiol/gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist priming protocol versus oral contraceptive microdose leuprolide. Fertil Steril 2011; 95: 592-595. [DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.10.003]
18. Palermo GD, Neri QV, Rosenwaks Z. To ICSI or Not to ICSI. Semin Reprod Med 2015; 33: 92-102. [DOI:10.1055/s-0035-1546825]
19. Barad DH, Kim A, Kubba H, Weghofer A, Gleicher N. Does hormonal contraception prior to in vitro fertilization (IVF) negatively affect oocyte yields? A pilot study. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2013; 11: 28-33. [DOI:10.1186/1477-7827-11-28]

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA code

Send email to the article author


© 2018 All Rights Reserved | International Journal of Reproductive BioMedicine

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb