Dual trigger or hCG alone: A retrospective analysis on patients with diminished ovarian reserve under in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF-ET) treatment

IF 2.1 4区 医学 Q2 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Li-mei Wu , Ling Zhang , Meng-xia Ji, Lin Zhang, Zhen Jin, Shi-shi Li, Wei-hai Xu, Xiao-hua Fu, Yi-dan Wu
{"title":"Dual trigger or hCG alone: A retrospective analysis on patients with diminished ovarian reserve under in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF-ET) treatment","authors":"Li-mei Wu ,&nbsp;Ling Zhang ,&nbsp;Meng-xia Ji,&nbsp;Lin Zhang,&nbsp;Zhen Jin,&nbsp;Shi-shi Li,&nbsp;Wei-hai Xu,&nbsp;Xiao-hua Fu,&nbsp;Yi-dan Wu","doi":"10.1016/j.ejogrb.2024.09.039","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>With remarkable deficiency in both oocyte stock and competence, the prognosis of IVF-ET in diminished ovarian reserve (DOR) is obstinately poor, underscoring warranted optimization to current procedures. We compared the efficacy of dual-trigger (hCG plus GnRH-a) and hCG alone on the outcomes for DOR patients.</div></div><div><h3>Study design</h3><div>A total of 381 couples and 857 controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) cycles, and 222 couples and 366 frozen embryo transfer (FET) ones were included. The intermediate outcomes during oocyte retrieval and in vitro culture were compared based on COS dataset, while outcomes after embryo transfer analyzed based on FET dataset. The marginal effect of all study factors and covariates were evaluated with a cluster-weighted GEE model.</div></div><div><h3>Results and conclusion</h3><div>Neither the intermediate nor implantation outcomes were improved by dual-trigger. The OR values were 1.08 (95 % CI: 0.41–2.78) for retrieval cancellation, 1.33 (95 % CI: 0.89–2.00) for oocyte harvest, 1.04(95 %CI: 0.94–1.15) for viable embryo and 1.03(95 %CI: 0.88–1.19) for top-quality embryo. Similarly, the ORs were 0.90 (95 %CI: 0.62–1.30) for implantation and 0.97 (95 %CI: 0.56–1.69) for clinical pregnancy. This equivalence remained unchanged after adjusting for the covariates such as age, BMI, controlled ovarian stimulation protocols, etc. Thus, dual-trigger cannot provide significant advantage over hCG in related to immediate or clinical outcomes of IVF-ET treatments in DOR patients.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":11975,"journal":{"name":"European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology","volume":"302 ","pages":"Pages 339-345"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301211524005335","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective

With remarkable deficiency in both oocyte stock and competence, the prognosis of IVF-ET in diminished ovarian reserve (DOR) is obstinately poor, underscoring warranted optimization to current procedures. We compared the efficacy of dual-trigger (hCG plus GnRH-a) and hCG alone on the outcomes for DOR patients.

Study design

A total of 381 couples and 857 controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) cycles, and 222 couples and 366 frozen embryo transfer (FET) ones were included. The intermediate outcomes during oocyte retrieval and in vitro culture were compared based on COS dataset, while outcomes after embryo transfer analyzed based on FET dataset. The marginal effect of all study factors and covariates were evaluated with a cluster-weighted GEE model.

Results and conclusion

Neither the intermediate nor implantation outcomes were improved by dual-trigger. The OR values were 1.08 (95 % CI: 0.41–2.78) for retrieval cancellation, 1.33 (95 % CI: 0.89–2.00) for oocyte harvest, 1.04(95 %CI: 0.94–1.15) for viable embryo and 1.03(95 %CI: 0.88–1.19) for top-quality embryo. Similarly, the ORs were 0.90 (95 %CI: 0.62–1.30) for implantation and 0.97 (95 %CI: 0.56–1.69) for clinical pregnancy. This equivalence remained unchanged after adjusting for the covariates such as age, BMI, controlled ovarian stimulation protocols, etc. Thus, dual-trigger cannot provide significant advantage over hCG in related to immediate or clinical outcomes of IVF-ET treatments in DOR patients.
双重触发或单用 hCG:对接受体外受精和胚胎移植(IVF-ET)治疗的卵巢储备功能减退患者的回顾性分析。
目的:卵巢储备功能减退(DOR)患者的卵母细胞存量和能力均明显不足,IVF-ET的预后极差,因此需要对现有程序进行优化。我们比较了双触发(hCG 加 GnRH-a)和单用 hCG 对 DOR 患者疗效的影响:研究设计:共纳入了 381 对夫妇和 857 个控制性卵巢刺激(COS)周期,以及 222 对夫妇和 366 个冷冻胚胎移植(FET)周期。根据 COS 数据集比较了取卵和体外培养期间的中期结果,而根据 FET 数据集分析了胚胎移植后的结果。采用聚类加权 GEE 模型评估了所有研究因素和协变量的边际效应:结果和结论:双触发器均未改善中期和植入结果。取卵取消的 OR 值为 1.08(95 % CI:0.41-2.78),卵母细胞收获的 OR 值为 1.33(95 % CI:0.89-2.00),存活胚胎的 OR 值为 1.04(95 % CI:0.94-1.15),优质胚胎的 OR 值为 1.03(95 % CI:0.88-1.19)。同样,植入的 OR 值为 0.90(95 %CI:0.62-1.30),临床妊娠的 OR 值为 0.97(95 %CI:0.56-1.69)。在对年龄、体重指数、控制性卵巢刺激方案等协变量进行调整后,这种等效性保持不变。因此,在 DOR 患者的 IVF-ET 治疗的即时或临床结果方面,双触发器与 hCG 相比并无明显优势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
3.80%
发文量
898
审稿时长
8.3 weeks
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology is the leading general clinical journal covering the continent. It publishes peer reviewed original research articles, as well as a wide range of news, book reviews, biographical, historical and educational articles and a lively correspondence section. Fields covered include obstetrics, prenatal diagnosis, maternal-fetal medicine, perinatology, general gynecology, gynecologic oncology, uro-gynecology, reproductive medicine, infertility, reproductive endocrinology, sexual medicine and reproductive ethics. The European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology provides a forum for scientific and clinical professional communication in obstetrics and gynecology throughout Europe and the world.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信