Ahm Musleh Uddin , Gebremeskel Mamu Werid , Thien D. Van , Yunmei Song , Sanjay Garg , Roy N. Kirkwood , Kiro R. Petrovski
{"title":"用于控制猪繁殖的可注射或不可注射的GnRH类似物。系统回顾和荟萃分析","authors":"Ahm Musleh Uddin , Gebremeskel Mamu Werid , Thien D. Van , Yunmei Song , Sanjay Garg , Roy N. Kirkwood , Kiro R. Petrovski","doi":"10.1016/j.theriogenology.2025.117681","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogues are widely applied in swine production to synchronise ovulation and so facilitate fixed-time artificial insemination (FTAI). Both injectable and non-injectable formulations are available; however, their comparative effects on reproductive performance remain unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis, conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines, evaluated the impact of GnRH analogues on conception rate (CR), farrowing rate (FR), weaning-to-estrus interval (WEI), piglets born per litter (PBL), and piglets born alive (PBAL). Random-effect models were used to estimate pooled mean differences (MDs) with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was assessed using the I<sup>2</sup> statistic, and subgroup analyses compared injectable versus non-injectable regimens. The effect of a subgroup was analysed by administration route, insemination protocol, frequency, or AI method. Across the 27 included studies, GnRH analogue administration did not improve CR (MD = −0.00, 95 % CI: −0.05 to 0.05) or FR (MD = −0.02, 95 % CI: −0.06 to 0.01). Subgroup analyses showed no significant differences between injectable and non-injectable routes for any outcome, and heterogeneity remained low (I<sup>2</sup> = 0 %). A modest reduction in total PBL (MD = −0.33, 95 % CI –0.57 to −0.08) was evident without effect of subgroup. Although PBAL were slightly reduced (MD = −0.52, 95 % CI –0.82 to −0.22), particularly in subgroups by insemination protocol and insemination frequency there is no biological explanation for this finding. These findings suggest that while GnRH analogues are effective for synchronising ovulation, their influence on litter size is biologically modest. Importantly, non-injectable formulations demonstrated comparable outcomes to injectable approaches, supporting their potential as practical, less-invasive alternatives in commercial settings. To enable robust and parity-specific recommendations, further research should comprise adequately powered, parity-stratified randomised trials in gilts and primiparous (P1) sows. The effects of conventional and post-cervical routes on single FTAI should be assessed. Administration of standardised GnRH analogue dose and timing should be carried out to verify ovulation, control sperm numbers, and pre-specify outcomes (CR, FR, WEI, PBL, and PBAL).</div></div>","PeriodicalId":23131,"journal":{"name":"Theriogenology","volume":"250 ","pages":"Article 117681"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Injectable or non-injectable GnRH analogues for control of swine reproduction. A systematic review and meta-analysis\",\"authors\":\"Ahm Musleh Uddin , Gebremeskel Mamu Werid , Thien D. Van , Yunmei Song , Sanjay Garg , Roy N. Kirkwood , Kiro R. Petrovski\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.theriogenology.2025.117681\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><div>Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogues are widely applied in swine production to synchronise ovulation and so facilitate fixed-time artificial insemination (FTAI). Both injectable and non-injectable formulations are available; however, their comparative effects on reproductive performance remain unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis, conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines, evaluated the impact of GnRH analogues on conception rate (CR), farrowing rate (FR), weaning-to-estrus interval (WEI), piglets born per litter (PBL), and piglets born alive (PBAL). Random-effect models were used to estimate pooled mean differences (MDs) with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was assessed using the I<sup>2</sup> statistic, and subgroup analyses compared injectable versus non-injectable regimens. The effect of a subgroup was analysed by administration route, insemination protocol, frequency, or AI method. Across the 27 included studies, GnRH analogue administration did not improve CR (MD = −0.00, 95 % CI: −0.05 to 0.05) or FR (MD = −0.02, 95 % CI: −0.06 to 0.01). Subgroup analyses showed no significant differences between injectable and non-injectable routes for any outcome, and heterogeneity remained low (I<sup>2</sup> = 0 %). A modest reduction in total PBL (MD = −0.33, 95 % CI –0.57 to −0.08) was evident without effect of subgroup. Although PBAL were slightly reduced (MD = −0.52, 95 % CI –0.82 to −0.22), particularly in subgroups by insemination protocol and insemination frequency there is no biological explanation for this finding. These findings suggest that while GnRH analogues are effective for synchronising ovulation, their influence on litter size is biologically modest. Importantly, non-injectable formulations demonstrated comparable outcomes to injectable approaches, supporting their potential as practical, less-invasive alternatives in commercial settings. To enable robust and parity-specific recommendations, further research should comprise adequately powered, parity-stratified randomised trials in gilts and primiparous (P1) sows. The effects of conventional and post-cervical routes on single FTAI should be assessed. Administration of standardised GnRH analogue dose and timing should be carried out to verify ovulation, control sperm numbers, and pre-specify outcomes (CR, FR, WEI, PBL, and PBAL).</div></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":23131,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Theriogenology\",\"volume\":\"250 \",\"pages\":\"Article 117681\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Theriogenology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0093691X25004078\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Theriogenology","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0093691X25004078","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"REPRODUCTIVE BIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
Injectable or non-injectable GnRH analogues for control of swine reproduction. A systematic review and meta-analysis
Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogues are widely applied in swine production to synchronise ovulation and so facilitate fixed-time artificial insemination (FTAI). Both injectable and non-injectable formulations are available; however, their comparative effects on reproductive performance remain unclear. This systematic review and meta-analysis, conducted in accordance with PRISMA guidelines, evaluated the impact of GnRH analogues on conception rate (CR), farrowing rate (FR), weaning-to-estrus interval (WEI), piglets born per litter (PBL), and piglets born alive (PBAL). Random-effect models were used to estimate pooled mean differences (MDs) with 95 % confidence intervals (CIs). Heterogeneity was assessed using the I2 statistic, and subgroup analyses compared injectable versus non-injectable regimens. The effect of a subgroup was analysed by administration route, insemination protocol, frequency, or AI method. Across the 27 included studies, GnRH analogue administration did not improve CR (MD = −0.00, 95 % CI: −0.05 to 0.05) or FR (MD = −0.02, 95 % CI: −0.06 to 0.01). Subgroup analyses showed no significant differences between injectable and non-injectable routes for any outcome, and heterogeneity remained low (I2 = 0 %). A modest reduction in total PBL (MD = −0.33, 95 % CI –0.57 to −0.08) was evident without effect of subgroup. Although PBAL were slightly reduced (MD = −0.52, 95 % CI –0.82 to −0.22), particularly in subgroups by insemination protocol and insemination frequency there is no biological explanation for this finding. These findings suggest that while GnRH analogues are effective for synchronising ovulation, their influence on litter size is biologically modest. Importantly, non-injectable formulations demonstrated comparable outcomes to injectable approaches, supporting their potential as practical, less-invasive alternatives in commercial settings. To enable robust and parity-specific recommendations, further research should comprise adequately powered, parity-stratified randomised trials in gilts and primiparous (P1) sows. The effects of conventional and post-cervical routes on single FTAI should be assessed. Administration of standardised GnRH analogue dose and timing should be carried out to verify ovulation, control sperm numbers, and pre-specify outcomes (CR, FR, WEI, PBL, and PBAL).
期刊介绍:
Theriogenology provides an international forum for researchers, clinicians, and industry professionals in animal reproductive biology. This acclaimed journal publishes articles on a wide range of topics in reproductive and developmental biology, of domestic mammal, avian, and aquatic species as well as wild species which are the object of veterinary care in research or conservation programs.