Application of controlled ovarian hyperstimulation with agonist-antagonist protocol in POSEIDON group 3 and group 4 patients with low prognosis

刘源瀛,杜晓果,陈立雪,杨蕊,王永清,王颖,李蓉,刘平,乔杰
DOI: https://doi.org/10.3760/cma.j.cn101441-20210911-00409
2022-01-01
Abstract:Objective:By comparing standard gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist regimen and gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist-antagonist protocol (AAP regimen) in Patient-Oriented Strategies Encompassing Individualized Oocyte Number (POSEIDON) group 3 and group 4 patients with low prognosis, to study if AAP regimen could improve the clinical outcomes in low prognosis patients.Methods:A case-control study was performed, the clinical data of 646 cycles of prospective poor ovarian response (POR) patients (POSEIDON group 3 and 4) who received in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF-ET) in Peking University Third Hospital Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Reproductive Medical Center from January 2016 to May 2018 were retrospectively analyzed. The total number of AAP cycle was 323, and control group was selected from the database with 1∶1 matching of contemporaneous prospective POR patients (POSEIDON group 3 and group 4) with similar age and approaching date of oocyte retrieval. Patients' general information, ovarian stimulation indexes and clinical outcomes were compared. Results:AAP group had fewer antral follicle count (AFC) [3.00(2.00,4.00) vs. 4.00(2.00,5.00), P<0.001] and similar anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) level [0.51(0.25,0.83) μg/L vs. 0.53(0.31,0.81) μg/L, P>0.05] compared with control group. AAP group had shorter duration of gonadotropin (Gn) used [10.00(8.00,11.00) d vs. 10.00(9.00,11.00) d, P=0.020] and lower dosage of Gn used [2 675.00(2 100.00,3 300.00) U vs. 3 075.00(2 550.00,3 750.00) U, P<0.001] than control group. AAP group had similar number of oocytes obtained [3.00(2.00,5.00) vs. 4.00(2.00,6.00), P>0.05] compared with control group. Under the same proportion of fertilization schemes (routine or intracytoplasmic sperm injection methods), AAP group had higher fertilization rate [74.15% (955/1288) vs. 69.13% (918/1328), P=0.004] and good-quality embryo rate [62.57% (585/935) vs. 56.94% (509/894), P=0.014], and ultimately had higher embryo implantation rate [22.31% (87/390) vs. 15.84% (64/404), P=0.020], cumulative clinical pregnancy rate [32.50% (78/240) vs. 22.86% (56/245), P=0.018] and cumulative live birth rate [25.83% (62/240) vs. 17.96% (44/245), P=0.036]. Conclusion:For POSEIDON patients with low prognosis and POR, controlled ovarian hyperstimulation with AAP regimen had better clinical outcomes compared with conventional antagonist regimen.
What problem does this paper attempt to address?