The impact of Duostim protocol on pregnancy outcomes in infertile patients: A meta-analysis comparing single and double conventional stimulation cycles.
Youman Zeng, Weiwu Liu, Yudi Luo, Bowen Luo, Lingling Zhu, Zengyu Yang, Keng Feng, Derong Li, Sheng-Ao Chen, Xiang Li
{"title":"The impact of Duostim protocol on pregnancy outcomes in infertile patients: A meta-analysis comparing single and double conventional stimulation cycles.","authors":"Youman Zeng, Weiwu Liu, Yudi Luo, Bowen Luo, Lingling Zhu, Zengyu Yang, Keng Feng, Derong Li, Sheng-Ao Chen, Xiang Li","doi":"10.1007/s10815-024-03304-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The DuoStim protocol has been proposed as an alternative to conventional single and double stimulation cycles in the treatment of infertility. However, its efficacy in improving pregnancy outcomes remains uncertain.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To systematically evaluate the impact of the DuoStim protocol on pregnancy outcomes in infertile patients by comparing it with single and double conventional stimulation cycles.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>An online systematic search was conducted using PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE databases, covering the period from their inception to March 2024. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the DuoStim protocol with single and double conventional stimulation cycles in infertile patients were identified. Data were extracted by two independent investigators who screened the literature and assessed the quality of the studies. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4 software.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of six RCTs involving 414 infertile patients were included. The DuoStim protocol significantly increased the total number of oocytes compared to single and double conventional stimulation (MD = - 1.47; 95% CI, - 2.12 to - 0.82; P < 0.00001). There were no statistically significant differences in the number of MII oocytes, total embryos, pregnancy rate, and live birth rate. Subgroup Analysis: compared to single stimulation, the DuoStim protocol significantly increased the number of MII oocytes (MD = 1.71; 95% CI, 0.77 to 2.66; P = 0.0004) and total embryos (MD = 1.34; 95% CI, 0.61 to 2.08; P = 0.0003). There were no significant differences in pregnancy rate and live birth rate. Secondary outcomes showed the effect of the DuoStim protocol in patients undergoing preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies (PGT-A). The time to obtain euploid blastocysts was significantly reduced in the DuoStim group compared to the control group (23.3 ± 2.8 days vs. 44.1 ± 2.0 days; P < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The DuoStim protocol shows a significant advantage in increasing the total number of oocytes, MII oocytes, and embryos compared to single stimulation. However, it does not significantly improve pregnancy and live birth rates. The protocol also shortens the time to obtain euploid blastocysts in patients undergoing PGT-A, indicating potential benefits for specific patient groups. Further research is needed to confirm these findings and evaluate long-term outcomes. Thus, the quality of evidence should be considered moderate, warranting cautious interpretation of the results.</p>","PeriodicalId":15246,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-024-03304-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GENETICS & HEREDITY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Background: The DuoStim protocol has been proposed as an alternative to conventional single and double stimulation cycles in the treatment of infertility. However, its efficacy in improving pregnancy outcomes remains uncertain.
Objective: To systematically evaluate the impact of the DuoStim protocol on pregnancy outcomes in infertile patients by comparing it with single and double conventional stimulation cycles.
Methods: An online systematic search was conducted using PubMed, Cochrane Library, and EMBASE databases, covering the period from their inception to March 2024. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing the DuoStim protocol with single and double conventional stimulation cycles in infertile patients were identified. Data were extracted by two independent investigators who screened the literature and assessed the quality of the studies. Meta-analysis was performed using RevMan 5.4 software.
Results: A total of six RCTs involving 414 infertile patients were included. The DuoStim protocol significantly increased the total number of oocytes compared to single and double conventional stimulation (MD = - 1.47; 95% CI, - 2.12 to - 0.82; P < 0.00001). There were no statistically significant differences in the number of MII oocytes, total embryos, pregnancy rate, and live birth rate. Subgroup Analysis: compared to single stimulation, the DuoStim protocol significantly increased the number of MII oocytes (MD = 1.71; 95% CI, 0.77 to 2.66; P = 0.0004) and total embryos (MD = 1.34; 95% CI, 0.61 to 2.08; P = 0.0003). There were no significant differences in pregnancy rate and live birth rate. Secondary outcomes showed the effect of the DuoStim protocol in patients undergoing preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidies (PGT-A). The time to obtain euploid blastocysts was significantly reduced in the DuoStim group compared to the control group (23.3 ± 2.8 days vs. 44.1 ± 2.0 days; P < 0.001).
Conclusions: The DuoStim protocol shows a significant advantage in increasing the total number of oocytes, MII oocytes, and embryos compared to single stimulation. However, it does not significantly improve pregnancy and live birth rates. The protocol also shortens the time to obtain euploid blastocysts in patients undergoing PGT-A, indicating potential benefits for specific patient groups. Further research is needed to confirm these findings and evaluate long-term outcomes. Thus, the quality of evidence should be considered moderate, warranting cautious interpretation of the results.
期刊介绍：
The Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics publishes cellular, molecular, genetic, and epigenetic discoveries advancing our understanding of the biology and underlying mechanisms from gametogenesis to offspring health. Special emphasis is placed on the practice and evolution of assisted reproduction technologies (ARTs) with reference to the diagnosis and management of diseases affecting fertility. Our goal is to educate our readership in the translation of basic and clinical discoveries made from human or relevant animal models to the safe and efficacious practice of human ARTs. The scientific rigor and ethical standards embraced by the JARG editorial team ensures a broad international base of expertise guiding the marriage of contemporary clinical research paradigms with basic science discovery. JARG publishes original papers, minireviews, case reports, and opinion pieces often combined into special topic issues that will educate clinicians and scientists with interests in the mechanisms of human development that bear on the treatment of infertility and emerging innovations in human ARTs. The guiding principles of male and female reproductive health impacting pre- and post-conceptional viability and developmental potential are emphasized within the purview of human reproductive health in current and future generations of our species.
The journal is published in cooperation with the American Society for Reproductive Medicine, an organization of more than 8,000 physicians, researchers, nurses, technicians and other professionals dedicated to advancing knowledge and expertise in reproductive biology.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
