Factors affecting Embryo Quality and Pregnancy Outcome in Intra-Cytoplasmic Sperm Injection using Decapeptyl and Cetrorelix- A retrospective study
Laiba Masood, Faiza Alam, Nida Zahid, Ahmed Ayaz, Syed Sajjad Hussain, Rehana Rehman
Abstract
Objective: To compare embryo quality and pregnancy outcome of patients undergoing Intra-Cytoplasmic Sperm Injection (ICSI) via agonist and antagonist protocol at Australian Concept Infertility Medical Center (ACIMC), Karachi, Pakistan. Method: The ACIMC database extracted information of all adult infertile female patients who were recommended treatment of ICSI between 1st June 2015 till 31st August 2017.They were categorized on the basis of treatment by gonadotropin releasing hormone. One group was treated with the agonist (long term) and the other with the antagonist. The data was analyzed on STATA 12, independent T test/ Mann-Whitney U test, chi-square/ fisher exact test, and linear regression were performed where appropriate. Results: Of the 267, patient, 222 received GnRH agonists, while 45 were given GnRH antagonist. Univariable analysis showed an association of good quality embryos with the GnRH antagonist protocol, age, antral follicles, number of eggs fertilized and levels of; estradiol, follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) and prolactin (p<0.25). On the multivariable analysis, prolactin levels, number of eggs fertilized and inseminated were associated with good quality embryos. There was a significant relationship between estradiol and no of follicles (p value<0.05). Positive pregnancy outcome correlated with age, follicle count, FSH levels and eggs inseminated(p<0.25). Conclusion: Our results show that treatment type doesn’t have an influence on the embryo and pregnancy outcome. However, estradiol levels, prolactin levels, number of follicles and particularly female age are predictors of embryo quality.
Keywords
References
1. Kyrou D, Al-Azemi M, Papanikolaou EG, Donoso P, Tziomalos K, Devroey P, et al. The relationship of premature progesterone rise with serum estradiol levels and number of follicles in GnRH antagonist/recombinant FSH-stimulated cycles. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2012;162(2):165-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2012.02.025. PMid:22425288.
2. Gordts S, Van Turnhout C, Campo R, Puttemans P, Valkenburg M, Gordts S. A prospective randomised study comparing a GnRHantagonist versus a GnRH-agonist short protocol for ovarian stimulation in patients referred for IVF. Facts Views Vis ObGyn. 2012;4(2):82-7. PMid:24753894.
3. Ho C-H, Chen S-U, Peng F-S, Chang C-Y, Lien Y-R, Yang Y-S. Prospective comparison of short and long GnRH agonist protocols using recombinant gonadotrophins for IVF/ICSI treatments. Reprod Biomed Online. 2008;16(5):632-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S1472-6483(10)60476-2. PMid:18492366.
4. Berin I, Stein DE, Keltz MD. A comparison of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist and GnRH agonist flare protocols for poor responders undergoing in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 2010;93(2):360-3. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.11.007. PMid:19131055.
5. Malmusi S, La Marca A, Giulini S, Xella S, Tagliasacchi D, Marsella T, et al. Comparison of a gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist and GnRH agonist flare-up regimen in poor responders undergoing ovarian stimulation. Fertil Steril. 2005;84(2):402-6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.01.139. PMid:16084881.
6. Griesinger G, Felberbaum R, Diedrich K. GnRH-antagonists in reproductive medicine. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2005;273(2):71-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00404-005-0021-2. PMid:15991015.
7. Al‐Inany HG, Youssef MA, Ayeleke RO, Brown J, Lam WS, Broekmans FJ. Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonists for assisted reproductive technology. Cochrane Database of Syst Rev. 2016;11(5):CD001750.
8. Bodri D, Sunkara SK, Coomarasamy A. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists versus antagonists for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in oocyte donors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2011;95(1):164-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.06.068. PMid:20684954.
9. Takahashi K, Mukaida T, Tomiyama T, Goto T, Oka C. GnRH antagonist improved blastocyst quality and pregnancy outcome after multiple failures of IVF/ICSI–ET with a GnRH agonist protocol. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2004;21(9):317-22. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/B:JARG.0000045470.68525.a4. PMid:15587144.
10. Moragianni VA, Jones SM, Ryley DA. The effect of body mass index on the outcomes of first assisted reproductive technology cycles. Fertil Steril. 2012;98(1):102-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.04.004. PMid:22584023.
11. Thum MY, Kalu E, Abdalla H. Elevated basal FSH and embryo quality: Lessons from extended culture embryos: raised FSH and blastocyst quality. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2009;26(6):313-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10815-009-9313-y. PMid:19513823.
12. Alam F, Memon AS, Fatima SS. Increased body mass index may lead to hyperferritinemia irrespective of body iron stores. Pak J Med Sci. 2015;31(6):1521-6. PMid:26870128.
13. Rehman R, Hussain Z, Zahir H, Khan R. Impact of peak/mid luteal estradiol on pregnancy outcome after intracytoplasmic sperm injection. J Pak Med Assoc. 2014;64(7):780-4. PMid:25255586.
14. Rehman R, Irfan T, Jawed S, Hussain M, Ali R. Embryo quality in intracytoplasmic sperm injection: A quasi experimental design in Pakistan. J Pak Med Assoc. 2018;68(10):1451-5. PMid:30317340.
15. De Placido G, Mollo A, Clarizia R, Strina I, Conforti S, Alviggi CJF. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist plus recombinant luteinizing hormone vs. a standard GnRH agonist short protocol in patients at risk for poor ovarian response. Fertil Steril. 2006;85(1):247-50. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.07.1280. PMid:16412769.
16. Olivennes F, Belaisch-Allart J, Emperaire JC, Dechaud H, Alvarez S, Moreau L, et al. Prospective, randomized, controlled study of in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer with a single dose of a luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LH-RH) antagonist (cetrorelix) or a depot formula of an LH-RH agonist (triptorelin). Fertil Steril. 2000;73(2):314-20. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(99)00524-5. PMid:10685535.
17. Schmidt DW, Bremner T, Orris JJ, Maier DB, Benadiva CA, Nulsen JC. A randomized prospective study of microdose leuprolide versus ganirelix in in vitro fertilization cycles for poor responders. Fertil Steril. 2005;83(5):1568-71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2004.10.053. PMid:15866609.
18. Mitwally MF, Casper RF. Effect of in vivo GnRH agonist and GnRH antagonist on hCG and insulin-stimulated progesterone production by human granulosa-lutein cells in vitro. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2002;19(8):384-9. http://dx.doi.org/10.1023/A:1016398405248. PMid:12182445.
19. Lainas TG, Sfontouris IA, Papanikolaou EG, Zorzovilis JZ, Petsas GK, Lainas GT, et al. Flexible GnRH antagonist versus flare-up GnRH agonist protocol in poor responders treated by IVF: a randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod. 2008;23(6):1355-8. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humrep/den107. PMid:18403419.
20. Craft I, Gorgy A, Hill J, Menon D, Podsiadly BJHR. Will GnRH antagonists provide new hope for patients considereddifficult responders’ to GnRH agonist protocols? Hum Reprod. 1999;14(12):2959-62. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humrep/14.12.2959. PMid:10601078.
21. Kolibianakis E, Collins J, Tarlatzis B, Devroey P, Diedrich K, Griesinger G. Griesinger GJHru. Among patients treated for IVF with gonadotrophins and GnRH analogues, is the probability of live birth dependent on the type of analogue used? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2006;12(6):651-71. http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dml038. PMid:16920869.
22. Kamel A, Halim AA, Shehata M, AlFarra S, El-Faissal Y, Ramadan W, et al. Changes in serum prolactin level during intracytoplasmic sperm injection, and effect on clinical pregnancy rate: a prospective observational study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth. 2018;18(1):141. http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12884-018-1783-4. PMid:29739353.
23. Lebedeva IY, Singina GN, Lopukhov AV, Shedova EN, Zinovieva NA. Prolactin and growth hormone affect metaphase-II chromosomes in aging oocytes via cumulus cells using similar signaling pathways. Front Genet. 2015;6:274. http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fgene.2015.00274. PMid:26379702.
24. Joo BS, Park SH, An BM, Kim KS, Moon SE, Moon HS. Serum estradiol levels during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation influence the pregnancy outcome of in vitro fertilization in a concentration-dependent manner. Fertil Steril. 2010;93(2):442-6. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.02.066. PMid:19394001.
25. Zhang W, Tian Y, Xie D, Miao Y, Liu J, Wang X. The impact of peak estradiol during controlled ovarian stimulation on the cumulative live birth rate of IVF/ICSI in non-PCOS patients. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2019;36(11):2333-44. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10815-019-01568-w. PMid:31485870.
26. Rottiers A, Dalewyn L, Somers S, Alper M, Sakkas D, Gerris J. Correlation between sonographic follow-up of follicular growth, serum and salivary estradiol in women undergoing controlled ovarian stimulation (IVF/ICSI). Facts Views Vis ObGyn. 2018;10(4):173-9. PMid:31367289.
27. Nichols JE Jr, Crane MM, Higdon HL, Miller PB, Boone WR. Extremes of body mass index reduce in vitro fertilization pregnancy rates. Fertil Steril. 2003;79(3):645-7. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(02)04807-0. PMid:12620460.
28. Ahmed M, Shareef O, Adam I, Rayis D. Maternal age and intracytoplasmic sperm injection outcome in infertile couples at Khartoum, Sudan. F1000 Res. 2015;4:4. http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.7386.1. PMid:27347370.
Submitted date:
09/14/2020
Accepted date:
03/04/2021
Facebook
Google+
Twitter
LinkedIn
Mendeley
StumbleUpon
CiteULike
Reddit
Email