Search

Current Controlled Ovarian Stimulation (COH) for Assisted Reproductive Techniques (ART) pursues three main objectives: hypophyseal activity suppression, multiple follicle growth stimulation, and ovulation induction. By suppressing hypophyseal activity, it is possible to prevent untimely LH surge and allow the appropriate development of the leading follicle. The classical GnRH agonist long protocol is the most widely used in COH for ART. However, an alternative regimen based on GnRH antagonist has been recently introduced in clinical practice. As competitive antagonists, these drugs display an immediate and quickly reversible effect and they avoid hormonal withdrawal side effects. Moreover, this protocol shows undeniable advantages, including the shorter duration of the treatment, the lower amount of gonadotropin required, the shorter hormonal and ultrasound monitoring of patients, milder physical and emotional stress, and a lower risk of Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome (OHSS). The use of GnRH antagonists was traditionally restricted to selected patients, as "poor responders" and women at high-risk of developing OHSS such as Polycystic Ovary Syndrome (PCOS) and patients who had previously experienced OHSS. These findings could prompt a trend to change from the standard agonist protocol to the antagonist protocol in all categories of patients.This review provides a comprehensive overview of the use of GnRH antagonist protocols applied both to IVF techniques and to IUI procedures in the Italian experience. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The aim of this prospective observational study is to determine the different outcomes of IVF/ICSI treatments after using antagonists or agonists of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH) in normal responder patients. Two hundred forty-seven patients undergoing IVF treatment at the Centre of Reproductive Medicine, Rome (CERMER), from January 2005 to December 2008, were included in the study. Patients were stimulated either with a standard long protocol with GnRH agonists ( n = 156) or with GnRH antagonists ( n = 91). The use of GnRH antagonists resulted in a significant reduction in the duration of the stimulation (Agonist Group 14.10 ± 2.25 vs Antagonist Group 11.34 ± 2.11; p < 0.001) and in the amount of gonadotrophin (IU of r-FSH) needed (Agonist Group 1878 ± 1109 vs Antagonist Group 1331 ± 1049; p = 0.0014). Moreover a lower number of cycles were cancelled with the antagonist protocol (4.39 vs 6.41%). The GnRH antagonist protocol, when compared to the GnRH agonist one, is associated with a similar clinical pregnancy rate, similar implantation rate, significantly lower gonadotrophin requirement and shorter duration of stimulation. For this reason, GnRH antagonists might be a good treatment even for normal responder patients undergoing IVF. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]