COMPARISON OF CONTROLLED OVARY STIMULATION PROTOCOLS FOR IN VITRO FERTILISATION: A META-ANALYSIS.
Rong Li,Yichun Guan,Rui Yang,Valerie Perrot,M. A. Juan
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2020.08.1282
IF: 6.7
2020-01-01
Fertility and Sterility
Abstract:The purpose present of meta-analysis is to compare the effectiveness of different types of GnRH agonist (GnRH-a) protocols (long-acting follicular, long-acting luteal and short-acting luteal protocols) and GnRH antagonist (GnRH-ant) protocol for IVF. Meta-analysis. In this meta-analysis, a literature search was performed in both English and Chinese databases (PubMed, Embase, Cochrane, CNKI and Wanfang) using pre-defined search strings till 1st March 2019. The methodology adhered to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analysis guidelines and registered in PROSPERO (CRD42019139396). RCTs and observational studies that compared GnRH-a protocols (long-acting follicular, long-acting luteal and short-acting luteal) and GnRH-ant protocols were included. The primary outcome was live birth rate (LBR); the secondary outcomes were clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), implantation rate (IR) and safety in terms of miscarriage rate (MR) and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) rates. ‘R software’ was used for statistical analysis. Outcomes were reported in terms of relative risk (RR) and 95% confidence interval (CI) with P value <0.05 considered statistically significant. Literature search retrieved 5331 studies of which 111 were included. Long-acting follicular agonist protocol (13 studies) consisted of 1878 and 2342 women in agonist and antagonist arms respectively. No significant difference was observed in LBR (RR=1.38, 95%CI: 0.79-2.39, P=0.2542) and MR (RR=0.97, 95%CI: 0.63-1.49, P=0.8833). CPR (RR=1.48, 95%CI: 1.37-1.59, P<.0001) and IR (RR=1.39, 95%CI: 1.10-1.76, P=0.0062) were significantly higher in agonist group whereas OHSS was significantly lower in GnRH-ant group (RR=1.35, 95%CI: 1.06-1.72, P=0.015).The long-acting luteal agonist protocol included 24 studies: 6579 and 2900 women in agonist and antagonist arms, respectively. There was no significant difference in LBR (RR=1.02, 95%CI: 0.91-1.14, P=0.75), CPR (RR=1.48, 95%CI 0.80-2.76, P=0.21) and MR (RR=0.90, 95%CI: 0.64-1.26, P=0.536). CPR/transfer (RR=1.07, 95%CI: 1.01-1.14, P=0.0194) and IR (RR=1.17, 95%CI: 1.03-1.32, P=0.0161) were significantly higher in agonist group but OHSS was significantly lower in GnRH-ant group (RR=1.29, 95% CI 1.02-1.63, P=0.0311).The short-acting luteal agonist protocol included 74 studies:7385 and 11881 women in agonist and antagonist arms, respectively. LBR (RR=1.34, 95% CI 1.22-1.48, P<.0001) was significantly higher in the short-acting luteal agonist group. There was no significant difference in CPR (RR=1.01, 95%CI 0.93-1.09, P<.834), CPR/cycle (RR=1.05, 95%CI 0.93-1.18, P=0.415), CPR/transfer (RR=1.06, 95%CI 0.88-1.27, P=0.548), IR (RR=1.02, 95%CI 0.95-1.10, P=.563) and MR (RR=0.92, 95%CI 0.74-1.15, P=0.473). However, a significantly lower OHSS rate was observed in GnRH-ant group (RR=1.61, 95% CI 1.33-1.94, P<0.0001). GnRH-a long protocols were found to have potential benefit over the GnRH-ant protocol in terms of live birth rate, clinical pregnancy rate and implantation rate.