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

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.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.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).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.