Comparison of stimulated versus modified natural cycles for endometrial preparation prior to frozen embryo transfer: a randomized controlled trial.

RESEARCH QUESTION: To compare stimulated cycle (STC) versus modified natural cycle (MNC) for endometrial preparation prior to frozen embryo transfer (FET) in terms of convenience and efficacy. DESIGN: Prospective, open-label, randomized controlled study including 119 patients aged 20-38 years, undergoing intra-conjugal IVF/intracytoplasmic sperm injection, having regular cycles, at least two day 2 or day 3 frozen embryos, for whom it was the first or second FET performed, randomized to either MNC (n = 59) or STC (n = 60). Monitoring consisted of ultrasound and hormonal measurements. The number of monitoring visits required was compared between the two groups. RESULTS: STC required a significantly lower number of monitoring visits compared with MNC (3.6 ± 0.9 versus 4.4 ± 1.1, respectively, P < 0.0001), a lower number of blood tests (2.7 ± 0.8 versus 3.5 ± 1.0, respectively, P < 0.0001) and of ultrasounds (1.2 ± 0.4 versus 1.5 ± 0.6, respectively, P = 0.0039). FET during 'non-opening' hours (22.6% versus 27.5%, respectively, P = 0.32) and cancellation rates (11.7% versus 11.9%, respectively, P = 0.97) were comparable between the STC and MNC groups. No difference concerning HCG-positive rates (34.0% versus 23.1%, respectively, P = 0.22) nor live birth rates (24.5% for STC versus 23.1% for MNC, respectively, P = 0.86) was observed. Quality of life as defined by the FertiQol score was not different (P > 0.05 for each item). CONCLUSION: Altogether, these findings can be used for everyday clinical practice to better inform patients when deciding on the protocol to use for FET. These results suggest that MNC is a good option for patients reluctant to have injections, but requires increased monitoring. STC may offer more flexibility for patients and IVF centres.

Intralipid® may represent a new hope for patients with reproductive failures and simultaneously an over-immune endometrial activation.

PROBLEM: Continuous failures to achieve a pregnancy despite effective embryo transfers is extremely distressing for couples. In consequence, many adjuvant therapies to IVF have been proposed to achieve an "ideal" immune environment. We here focus on Intralipid® therapy (IL) reported to have immunosuppressive properties on NK cells. METHOD OF STUDY: 94 patients exhibited an immune profile of endometrial over-immune activation and an history of repeated implantation failures despite multiple embryos transfers (RIF). They received a slow perfusion of Intralipid®. We here report the live birth rate following the procedure at the next embryo transfer. To get new insight on its mechanism of action, a second immune profiling had been performed under Intralipid® before the embryo transfer. RESULTS: The live birth rate of the RIF cohort treated with Intralipid® reached 54% (51/94) at the next embryo transfer. In patients successfully pregnant under Intralipid® who benefitted of a test of sensibility before the embryo transfer, we observed a significant decrease of the three biomarkers used to diagnose the over-immune endometrial activation (CD56 cells; IL-18/TWEAK, IL-14/FN-14). CONCLUSIONS: Double blind placebo versus Intralipid® studies should be conducted. Intralipid® may be an option to explore in RIF patients who exhibit an over-immune activation of uNK cells.