The effects of different endometrial preparation regimens on pregnancy outcomes in frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles: a prospective randomized controlled study.

IF 2 4区 医学 Q3 ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM
Gynecological Endocrinology Pub Date : 2023-12-01 Epub Date: 2023-10-20 DOI:10.1080/09513590.2023.2269235
Jianyun Huang, Xuedan Jiao, Yang You, Yingchen Wu, Haiyan Lin, Qingxue Zhang
{"title":"The effects of different endometrial preparation regimens on pregnancy outcomes in frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles: a prospective randomized controlled study.","authors":"Jianyun Huang,&nbsp;Xuedan Jiao,&nbsp;Yang You,&nbsp;Yingchen Wu,&nbsp;Haiyan Lin,&nbsp;Qingxue Zhang","doi":"10.1080/09513590.2023.2269235","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>An increasing number of research have emerged to compare the pregnancy outcomes between the natural cycle and the hormone replacement therapy (HRT) cycle in preparing the endometrium for frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET), but the results are controversial. This prospective randomized controlled study was hence designed to obtain more solid evidence.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>In this study, patients with regular menstrual cycle length (21-35 days) who underwent FET between January 2010 to December 2017 were recruited for this study. Upon further filtering with the selection criteria of patients being, a total of 405 patients were recruited and randomized. Finally, analysis was performed on 384 patients: 178 belonged to the natural cycle group whereas the remaining 206 were in the HRT group. The primary outcome was live birth rate, while the secondary outcomes were implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rate, early miscarriage rate, late miscarriage rate, multiple birth rate and low birth weight rate.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The live birth rate (37.6% <i>vs</i> 30.1%, <i>p</i> = 0.119) of natural cycle group were higher than those of the hormone replacement therapy group, although the difference was not significant. The secondary outcomes were not found to differ significantly between the two groups. Nonetheless, the endometrium was found to be thicker in the natural cycle group (10.75 mm) than the HRT group (9.00 mm) (<i>p</i> < 0.001).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>No significant differences were observed between the pregnancy outcomes of the natural cycle group and the HRT group which comprised of patients with regular menstrual cycle length.</p>","PeriodicalId":12865,"journal":{"name":"Gynecological Endocrinology","volume":"39 1","pages":"2269235"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Gynecological Endocrinology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09513590.2023.2269235","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/10/20 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENDOCRINOLOGY & METABOLISM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: An increasing number of research have emerged to compare the pregnancy outcomes between the natural cycle and the hormone replacement therapy (HRT) cycle in preparing the endometrium for frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET), but the results are controversial. This prospective randomized controlled study was hence designed to obtain more solid evidence.

Materials and methods: In this study, patients with regular menstrual cycle length (21-35 days) who underwent FET between January 2010 to December 2017 were recruited for this study. Upon further filtering with the selection criteria of patients being, a total of 405 patients were recruited and randomized. Finally, analysis was performed on 384 patients: 178 belonged to the natural cycle group whereas the remaining 206 were in the HRT group. The primary outcome was live birth rate, while the secondary outcomes were implantation rate, clinical pregnancy rate, early miscarriage rate, late miscarriage rate, multiple birth rate and low birth weight rate.

Results: The live birth rate (37.6% vs 30.1%, p = 0.119) of natural cycle group were higher than those of the hormone replacement therapy group, although the difference was not significant. The secondary outcomes were not found to differ significantly between the two groups. Nonetheless, the endometrium was found to be thicker in the natural cycle group (10.75 mm) than the HRT group (9.00 mm) (p < 0.001).

Conclusion: No significant differences were observed between the pregnancy outcomes of the natural cycle group and the HRT group which comprised of patients with regular menstrual cycle length.

不同子宫内膜制备方案对冻融胚胎移植周期妊娠结局的影响:一项前瞻性随机对照研究。
目的:越来越多的研究比较了自然周期和激素替代疗法(HRT)周期在为冻融胚胎移植(FET)准备子宫内膜时的妊娠结果,但结果存在争议。因此,这项前瞻性随机对照研究旨在获得更确凿的证据。材料和方法:在本研究中,月经周期长度有规律的患者(21-35 天),他们在2010年1月至2017年12月期间接受了FET。根据患者的选择标准进行进一步筛选后,共招募了405名患者并将其随机分组。最后,对384名患者进行了分析:178名患者属于自然周期组,其余206名患者属于激素替代疗法组。主要结果是活产率,次要结果是植入率、临床妊娠率、早期流产率、晚期流产率、多胎出生率和低出生体重率。结果:活产率(37.6%vs 30.1%,p = 0.119)均高于激素替代治疗组,但差异不显著。次要结果在两组之间没有发现显著差异。尽管如此,发现自然周期组的子宫内膜更厚(10.75 mm)高于HRT组(9.00 mm)(p 结论:自然周期组和HRT组的妊娠结局没有显著差异,HRT组由月经周期正常的患者组成。
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
Gynecological Endocrinology
Gynecological Endocrinology 医学-妇产科学
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
5.00%
发文量
137
审稿时长
3-6 weeks
期刊介绍: Gynecological Endocrinology , the official journal of the International Society of Gynecological Endocrinology, covers all the experimental, clinical and therapeutic aspects of this ever more important discipline. It includes, amongst others, papers relating to the control and function of the different endocrine glands in females, the effects of reproductive events on the endocrine system, and the consequences of endocrine disorders on reproduction
×
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