Combined use of oestradiol and progesterone to support luteal phase in antagonist intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles of normoresponder women: a case-control study.

We evaluated the effect of combined use of oral oestrogen (E2) and vaginal progesterone (P) to support luteal phase in antagonist intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles. We analysed data from 176 patients who underwent ICSI cycles with antagonist protocol. P 90 mg vaginal gel once a day and micronised E2 of 4 mg/day, were started from the day of oocyte pick up and continued to the 12th day of embryo transfer. Group 1 (n = 79) patients received E2 + P for luteal phase support. In group 2 (n = 97) patients, only P 90 mg vaginal gel was used for luteal phase support. There were no significant differences between group 1 and group 2 patients in terms of clinical pregnancy rates (PRs) (26.58% vs. 20.62%, p = .352), early pregnancy loss rates (6.33% vs. 6.19%, p = .969), incidence of luteal vaginal bleeding (8.86% vs. 8.25%, p = .885) and implantation rates (22.8% vs. 16.9%, p = .298). In conclusion, our study showed no beneficial effect of addition of E2 to luteal phase support on clinical PR in antagonist IVF cycles.Impact statementWhat is already known on this subject? Luteal phase deficiency is defined as a disruption in progesterone and oestrogen production after ovulation. It is clear that, luteal phase supplementation to improve the outcomes in in vitro fertilisation (IVF) cycles is mandatory. As an iatrogenic complication of assisted reproductive technique, decreased luteal oestrogen and progesterone levels lead to decreased pregnancy rates (PRs) and implantation rates.What the results of this study add? In this study, we aimed to present the role of luteal phase oestrogen administration in GnRH antagonist cycles. A total of 176 cases received progesterone vaginal gel form for luteal phase support. Study group received 4 mg oral oestradiol hemihydrate in addition to progesterone. Compared to previous studies, our study consisted of larger number of patients and we used oestradiol through oral route. We found out that luteal oestradiol support did not improve the clinical PR.What the implications are of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? Our study showed no beneficial effect of addition of oestradiol to luteal phase support on clinical PR in antagonist IVF cycles.

Cytoplasmic abnormalities of mature oocytes have a significant effect on fertilization in Bologna poor responders

Background/aim: We aimed to investigate whether oocyte morphologic abnormalities affected cycle outcome in poor responder infertile women who fulfilled the Bologna criteria. Materials and methods: Data were obtained from infertile couples who underwent ICSI and embryo transfer at the Zeynep Kamil Maternity and Children's Health Training and Research Hospital Assisted Reproduction Unit in Istanbul, Turkey. They were allocated to two groups: Group A, poor responders, and Group B, normal responders. All morphological abnormalities of oocytes retrieved were reviewed and grouped as cytoplasmic abnormalities or extracytoplasmic abnormalities. All morphological features were compared between the poor and normal responder groups. ICSI cycle outcomes were described as biochemical pregnancy, fertilization rate, number of top-quality zygotes, top-quality zygote rate, number of embryos transferred, and number of top-quality embryos transferred. The relation between each morphological feature and ICSI outcomes was investigated in each group. Results: The results showed no difference between the groups in terms of morphological features of oocytes. The relation between ICSI cycle outcomes and each oocyte morphological feature was compared in the poor and normal responder groups. Presence of cytoplasmic morphological abnormality was found to significantly correlate with the fertilization rate (P = 0.019) in poor responders. Conclusion: Our data show that oocyte cytoplasmic abnormalities significantly reduce fertilization achievement in poor responders.

Comparison of ovarian responsiveness tests with outcome of assisted reproductive technology - a retrospective analysis.

INTRODUCTION: This study aims to compare the association between the most commonly used ovarian responsiveness markers - age, anti-Müllerian hormone levels (AMH), antral follicle count (AFC), ovarian sensitivity index (OSI), and ovarian response prediction index (ORPI) - and ovarian responsiveness to gonadotropin stimulation in assisted reproductive technology (ART) cycles. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Patients who underwent intracytoplasmic sperm injection treatment using either a gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist or agonist protocol were enrolled in the study. Data of the patients were abstracted from the hospital's database. Tests were compared for total number of retrieved oocytes, metaphase II (MII) oocytes, embryos, good quality embryos on day 1 and day 3, and ongoing pregnancies per cycle. RESULTS: The OSI was the ovarian response test that had the strongest relationship with the ART outcomes. The level of association between the ovarian response tests and poor ovarian response data was (in descending order): OSI, ORPI, AFC, AMH, and age (AUCOSI = 0.976, AUCORPI = 0.905, AUCAFC = 0.899, AUCAMH = 0.864, AUCage = 0.617). The overall association between OSI and poor ovarian response was significantly higher than the other parameters (p1 = 0.0023, p2 = 0.0014, p3 = 0.0001, p4 ≤ 0.0001). In patients with high ovarian response data, OSI had the highest association, followed by AFC and ORPI age (AUCOSI = 0.984, AUCAFC = 0.907, AUCORPI = 0.887). There was no statistically significant difference among the tests for the data of patients with ongoing pregnancies. CONCLUSIONS: In this study, which is the first study comparing the five most frequently used ovarian responsiveness markers and the second study signifying the role of OSI in an antagonist protocol, OSI was found to be more convenient to calculate, and it could be superior to other ovarian responsiveness markers for poor and high ovarian responses on cycles with agonist or antagonist protocols.

The effects of supraphysiological oestrogen levels on ventricular repolarisation parameters.

BACKGROUND: The frequency of arrhythmic death developing without a structural cardiac disease is higher in women. Also, female sex is an independent risk factor regarding development of torsades de pointes. Several studies have been conducted on the physiological and therapeutic effects of sex hormones on the cardiac conduction system. AIM: In this study we aim to examine the effect of hormonal changes, especially supraphysiological E2 level changes occurring during in vitro fertilisation treatment, on ventricular repolarisation parameters. METHODS: The study included female patients aged between 23 and 39 years, who were administered controlled ovarian hyperstimulation treatment. Patients' electrocardiograms and blood samples were obtained and analysed before and after the ovarian hyperstimulation treatment. RESULTS: Mean QTc intervals before ovarian hyperstimulation were 411.9 ± 23.7 ms. Measurements during oestradiol peak were calculated as 420.7 ± 23.3 ms, and the QTc interval increase was significant (p = 0.007). Corrected QT dispersion averages were not significant before or after hyperstimulation (53 ± 17 ms vs. 54.5 ± 18.2 ms, respectively, p > 0.05). Tp-e, J-T peak, and PR dispersion changes were not significant after the ovarian hyperstimulation therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Supraphysiological oestradiol levels that occur during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation cause prolongation of QTc intervals, but not to a pathological level. Although this prolongation is not significant in healthy individuals, it might increase ventricular arrhythmia risk in patients with congenital long QT syndrome and in patients taking medication that prolongs QT.

A comparison of treatment results of the different treatment protocols in patients with poor ovarian response.

To compare the effect of the different protocols in patients receiving in vitro fertilization treatment due to poor ovarian response. Seventy-seven of the patients included in the study were treated with gonadotropin (450 IU) + GnRH antagonist (group 1), 84 of the patients were treated with gonadotropin (450 IU) + microdose GnRH analog (group 2), and 53 of the patients were treated with clomiphene citrate (100 mg/day) + gonadotropin (300 IU) + GnRH antagonist (Group 3). In assessing total gonadotropin dosage, patients in Group 3 detected significantly less gonadotropin as compared to the other two groups (p < .001). Group 1 were superior to the other two groups with respect to retrieved oocytes, meiosis II oocytes and number of embryos obtained at the end of the treatment. As for the evaluation of clinical pregnancy, although the highest pregnancy rate was in Group 3, this finding was not of statistical significance. Although increasing the dosage of gonadotropins for ovarian hyper stimulation treatment in patients with poor ovarian response is beneficial with respect to retrieved oocytes, meiosis II oocytes and number of embryos, the increased dosage does not provide a statistically significant increase in clinical pregnancy rates.

Characteristics and outcomes of in vitro fertilization in different phenotypes of polycystic ovary syndrome.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to investigate whether polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) phenotype without polycystic ovaries (PCO) differs in terms of in vitro fertilization (IVF) outcomes compared with classic phenotypes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This retrospective controlled study included 262 patients who underwent IVF treatment with an indication of unexplained or tubal factor infertility (control group), ovulatory patients with PCO morphology (group 1), PCOS phenotype with oligoanovulation and hyperandrogenemia (group 2), PCOS phenotype with PCO morphology and oligoanovulation (group 3). Outcomes and baseline characteristics of IVF-embryo transfer treatments were compared among all groups. RESULTS: PCOS phenotype without PCO morphology had similar IVF stimulation characteristics compared with classic phenotypes; however, a higher total gonadotropin dose was needed to achieve similar results compared with patients with PCO morphology with or without PCOS. Basal follicle-stimulating hormone level (beta coefficient=0.207, p=0.003), group (beta coefficient=-0.305, p<0.001) and age (beta coefficient=0.311, p<0.001) were significantly associated with the total gonadotropin dose. The number of good quality embryo on transfer day was significantly lower in patients with isolated PCO morphology and PCO morphology with oligoanovulation than in those with PCOS phenotype without PCO morphology. CONCLUSION: PCO morphology provides easier stimulation, whereas hyperandrogenemia provides better results as good quality embryos. However, the end point is similar in terms of biochemical, clinical, and ongoing pregnancy rates.

The outcomes of controlled ovarian hyperstimulation/intrauterine insemination in patients with unilateral tubal occlusion on hysterosalpingograph.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of the present study was to evaluate the pregnancy rates of intrauterine insemination (IUI) and controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) in patients with one-sided tubal occlusion on hysterosalpingography (HSG). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients who underwent COH/IUI were enrolled into this retrospective cohort study. The patients with one-sided tubal occlusion diagnosed under HSG who met the inclusion criteria were accepted into the study group. The control group consisted of patients with unexplained infertility. The outcomes of COH/IUI were compared between the study and control groups. RESULTS: Ninety-seven patients in the study group (n=44) and control group (n=53) who underwent COH/IUI treatment were included into study. The biochemical, clinical, and ongoing pregnancy rates were similar between patients with unilateral occlusion diagnosed under HSG and those with unexplained infertility. The spontaneous pregnancy rate within one year was higher in patients with normal HSG than in patients with unilateral tubal occlusion, but the difference did not show statistical significance. CONCLUSION: Infertile patients with one-sided tubal occlusion in HSG can be managed as with patients with unexplained infertility and normal HSG findings. In addition, COH/IUI may be considered as the first-line treatment option in the management of these patients.