Progestin-Primed Ovarian Stimulation versus GnRH Antagonist Protocol for Ovarian Stimulation in IVF: A Prospective Pilot Study

Background: Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) has been proposed as an alternative to conventional gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol for ovarian stimulation in in vitro fertilization (IVF). The aim of PPOS is to provide an effective, patient-friendly treatment. Howev...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Fertility & reproduction Vol. 6; no. 1; pp. 23 - 27
Main Authors: Le, Tien K., Le, Xuyen H., Nguyen, Duy L., Vu, Anh L., Vuong, Lan N.
Format: Journal Article
Language:English
Published: World Scientific Publishing 01-03-2024
Subjects:
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Background: Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) has been proposed as an alternative to conventional gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol for ovarian stimulation in in vitro fertilization (IVF). The aim of PPOS is to provide an effective, patient-friendly treatment. However, studies comparing outcomes after the use of PPOS and GnRH antagonist protocol in IVF have shown mixed results. This study compared ongoing pregnancy rates after the use of PPOS versus GnRH antagonist protocol for ovarian stimulation in IVF. Methods: This prospective pilot study was conducted at a single IVF center. Women aged 18–35 years old with an anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) level greater than or equal to 1.2[Formula: see text]ng/mL or an antral follicle count (AFC) greater than or equal to 5 who were undergoing their first IVF cycle were allocated to undergoing ovarian stimulation using PPOS (dydrogesterone 20[Formula: see text]mg/day started on the day of gonadotropin) or a GnRH antagonist protocol (fixed regimen from stimulation day 5). The primary outcome was the ongoing pregnancy rate (at 12 weeks’ gestation). Results: The study included 30 women (15 in each treatment group). Baseline characteristics were similar between groups. The ongoing pregnancy rate was 7/15 (46.7%) in the PPOS group and 8/15 (53.3%) in the GnRH antagonist group ([Formula: see text]); the number of oocytes retrieved and fertilization rates were also comparable between groups. One case of mild ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) occurred in the GnRH antagonist group. Conclusions: This pilot study showed similar ongoing pregnancy rates after the use of a PPOS protocol and a conventional GnRH antagonist protocol for ovarian stimulation in IVF. Additional studies with larger sample sizes are needed to confirm these findings.
ISSN:2661-3182
2661-3174
DOI:10.1142/S2661318224500038