Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) in preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy: a retrospective study and meta-analysis

IF 2.1 3区 医学 Q2 OBSTETRICS & GYNECOLOGY
Xi Qin, Li Fan, Yuxing Luo, Zhibing Deng, Zhonghong Zeng, Xiaoling Jiang, Yihua Yang
{"title":"Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) in preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy: a retrospective study and meta-analysis","authors":"Xi Qin,&nbsp;Li Fan,&nbsp;Yuxing Luo,&nbsp;Zhibing Deng,&nbsp;Zhonghong Zeng,&nbsp;Xiaoling Jiang,&nbsp;Yihua Yang","doi":"10.1007/s00404-024-07918-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Information on the impact of Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) protocol on embryo euploid status and preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) outcomes is limited compared with other ovarian stimulation protocols. We conducted a retrospective cohort study and a meta-analysis to evaluate the application value of the PPOS protocol in PGT-A cycles.</p><h3>Methods</h3><p>In the cohort study, we retrospectively analyzed 962 ovarian stimulation cycles, including 413 cycles of PPOS protocol, 327 cycles of gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH-ant) protocol, and 222 cycles of GnRH agonist (GnRH-a) protocol. In the meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Sinomed, CNKI, Wanfang and VIP databases as well as clinical trial registration websites. Pooled or narrative analyses were performed on embryo and pregnancy outcomes according to whether baseline characteristics were balanced.</p><h3>Results</h3><p>In our retrospective study, compared to the GnRH agonist protocol, patients receiving the PPOS and GnRH antagonist protocols were older, and there was a significant decrease in the number of antral follicles, Anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) levels, stimulation duration, gonadotropin (Gn) dosage, as well as the number of retrieved oocytes and euploid blastocysts. Regression analysis showed that the ovarian stimulation protocol was not associated with the number of euploid blastocysts or the rate of euploid blastocysts per biopsy. There were no significant differences in the rates of biochemical pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, premature birth, live birth, or miscarriage per embryo transfer among the three groups. The meta-analysis included data from seven studies. There were no significant differences in stimulation duration, Gn dosage, number of oocytes retrieved, number of euploid blastocysts, euploid blastocyst rate, clinical pregnancy rate, or live birth rate between PPOS protocol and GnRH antagonist protocol, but the abortion rate of PPOS protocol decreased significantly.</p><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Current findings indicate that the PPOS protocol is comparable to other ovarian stimulation protocols in embryo euploid status or pregnancy outcomes and may be an attractive option in PGT-A cycles, which needs to be validated in more well-designed RCTs and long-term follow-ups.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":8330,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics","volume":"311 4","pages":"1181 - 1193"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007/s00404-024-07918-z.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s00404-024-07918-z","RegionNum":3,"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

Background

Information on the impact of Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) protocol on embryo euploid status and preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A) outcomes is limited compared with other ovarian stimulation protocols. We conducted a retrospective cohort study and a meta-analysis to evaluate the application value of the PPOS protocol in PGT-A cycles.

Methods

In the cohort study, we retrospectively analyzed 962 ovarian stimulation cycles, including 413 cycles of PPOS protocol, 327 cycles of gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH-ant) protocol, and 222 cycles of GnRH agonist (GnRH-a) protocol. In the meta-analysis, we searched PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Sinomed, CNKI, Wanfang and VIP databases as well as clinical trial registration websites. Pooled or narrative analyses were performed on embryo and pregnancy outcomes according to whether baseline characteristics were balanced.

Results

In our retrospective study, compared to the GnRH agonist protocol, patients receiving the PPOS and GnRH antagonist protocols were older, and there was a significant decrease in the number of antral follicles, Anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) levels, stimulation duration, gonadotropin (Gn) dosage, as well as the number of retrieved oocytes and euploid blastocysts. Regression analysis showed that the ovarian stimulation protocol was not associated with the number of euploid blastocysts or the rate of euploid blastocysts per biopsy. There were no significant differences in the rates of biochemical pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, premature birth, live birth, or miscarriage per embryo transfer among the three groups. The meta-analysis included data from seven studies. There were no significant differences in stimulation duration, Gn dosage, number of oocytes retrieved, number of euploid blastocysts, euploid blastocyst rate, clinical pregnancy rate, or live birth rate between PPOS protocol and GnRH antagonist protocol, but the abortion rate of PPOS protocol decreased significantly.

Conclusions

Current findings indicate that the PPOS protocol is comparable to other ovarian stimulation protocols in embryo euploid status or pregnancy outcomes and may be an attractive option in PGT-A cycles, which needs to be validated in more well-designed RCTs and long-term follow-ups.

黄体酮诱导卵巢刺激(PPOS)在非整倍体植入前基因检测中的应用:一项回顾性研究和荟萃分析。
背景:与其他卵巢刺激方案相比,关于孕激素卵巢刺激(PPOS)方案对胚胎整倍体状态和着床前非整倍体基因检测(PGT-A)结果的影响的信息有限。我们进行了一项回顾性队列研究和荟萃分析,以评估PPOS方案在PGT-A周期中的应用价值。方法:回顾性分析962个卵巢刺激周期,其中PPOS方案413个周期,促性腺激素释放激素拮抗剂(GnRH-ant)方案327个周期,GnRH激动剂(GnRH-a)方案222个周期。meta分析检索了PubMed、Embase、Cochrane Library、Web of Science、Sinomed、CNKI、万方、VIP等数据库以及临床试验注册网站。根据基线特征是否平衡,对胚胎和妊娠结局进行汇总或叙述分析。结果:在我们的回顾性研究中,与GnRH激动剂方案相比,接受PPOS和GnRH拮抗剂方案的患者年龄较大,并且在窦卵泡数量,抗苗勒管激素(AMH)水平,刺激时间,促性腺激素(Gn)剂量以及回收的卵母细胞和整倍体囊胚数量方面均显着减少。回归分析显示,卵巢刺激方案与整倍体囊胚数量或每次活检的整倍体囊胚率无关。三组间每次胚胎移植的生化妊娠率、临床妊娠率、早产率、活产率和流产率均无显著差异。荟萃分析包括来自七项研究的数据。PPOS方案与GnRH拮抗剂方案在刺激时间、Gn剂量、回收卵母细胞数量、整倍体囊胚数量、整倍体囊胚率、临床妊娠率、活产率方面均无显著差异,但流产率明显降低。结论:目前的研究结果表明,PPOS方案在胚胎整倍体状态或妊娠结局方面与其他卵巢刺激方案相当,可能是PGT-A周期中有吸引力的选择,这需要在更精心设计的随机对照试验和长期随访中进行验证。
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
4.70
自引率
15.40%
发文量
493
审稿时长
1 months
期刊介绍: Founded in 1870 as "Archiv für Gynaekologie", Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics has a long and outstanding tradition. Since 1922 the journal has been the Organ of the Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gynäkologie und Geburtshilfe. "The Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics" is circulated in over 40 countries world wide and is indexed in "PubMed/Medline" and "Science Citation Index Expanded/Journal Citation Report". The journal publishes invited and submitted reviews; peer-reviewed original articles about clinical topics and basic research as well as news and views and guidelines and position statements from all sub-specialties in gynecology and obstetrics.
×
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