Search

Study Question: Does dual trigger in freeze-all in vitro fertilization (IVF)/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles improve the cumulative live-birth outcome compared with human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) trigger? Summary Answer: Dual trigger for final follicular maturation improves the cumulative pregnancy and live-birth rates compared with hCG trigger in freeze-all IVF/ICSI cycles. What Is Known Already: Dual trigger could increase the numbers of oocytes and mature oocytes and improve pregnancy rates. Study Design, Size, Duration: This retrospective cohort analysis included data from 4438 freeze-all IVF/ICSI cycles between January 2012 and December 2017. Participants/Materials, Setting, Methods: Women aged 20−49 years who underwent ovarian stimulation and oocyte retrieval for autologous IVF/ICSI with a freeze-all policy in our centre were enrolled. Data on number of oocytes retrieved, number of mature oocytes, clinical pregnancy rate, live-birth rate, cumulative pregnancy rate, and cumulative live-birth rate (CLBR) were assessed and compared between patients who underwent a dual trigger and hCG trigger. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to identify and adjust for factors known to independently affect the CLBR. Main Results and the Role of Chance: A total of 4438 IVF/ICSI cycles were analyzed, including 1445 cycles with single hCG trigger and 2993 cycles with dual trigger. The cumulative biochemical pregnancy rate (60.8% vs. 68.1%, P<0.001; odds ratio (OR): 0.727; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.638–0.828), cumulative clinical pregnancy rate (52.9% vs. 58.5%, P<0.001; OR: 0.796; 95%CI: 0.701–0.903), and CLBR (44.3% vs. 50.5%, P<0.001; OR: 0.781; 95%CI: 0.688–10.886) were all significantly lower in the hCG-trigger group compared with the dual-trigger group. The clinical pregnancy rate (48.2% vs. 58.2%, P=0.002; OR: 0.829; 95%CI: 0.737–0.934) and embryo implantation rate (34.4% vs. 38.9%, P<0.001; OR: 0.823; 95%CI: 0.750–0.903) in each transfer cycle were also significantly lower in the hCG-trigger group compared with the dual-trigger group. After controlling for all potential confounding variables, the trigger method was identified as an independent factor affecting the CLBR. The OR and 95%CI for hCG trigger were 0.780 and 0.641–0.949 (P=0.013). Limitations, Reasons for Caution: The data used to analyse the effect of dual trigger on cumulative pregnancy and live-birth outcomes were retrospective, and the results may thus have been subject to inherent biases. Further prospective randomized controlled trials are required to verify the beneficial effects of dual trigger. Wider Implications of the Findings: Dual trigger had a positive effect on CLBRs, suggesting that it could be used as a routine trigger method in freeze-all cycles. Study Funding/Competing Interest(s): This study was supported by grants from National Key Research and Development Program of China (2018YFC1004800), the Natural Science Program of Zhejiang (LY19H040009), the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 81601236). No authors have competing interests to declare. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study Question: Is a dual ovulation trigger with a combination of GnRH agonist (GnRHa) and hCG superior to single hCG and/or single GnRHa trigger in improving treatment outcomes in advanced-age women (aged ≥ 35 years) undergoing IVF/ICSI treatment?, Summary Answer: Co-administration of GnRHa and hCG as a dual trigger increases the number of good-quality embryos but it is not associated with a higher number of oocytes retrieved, compared with single hCG or GnRHa trigger., What Is Known Already: Many studies have demonstrated that a dual trigger has positive impact on oocyte maturation, retrieval rate and pregnancy rate without increasing the risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) in some groups of IVF patients, when compared with single hCG trigger. Few studies have however been conducted to compare a dual trigger with a single GnRHa trigger, and insufficient evidence exists to support which trigger can achieve the best outcomes in IVF patients aged ≥35 years., Study Design, Size, Duration: This was an open-label randomized controlled trial of 510 participants conducted at single reproductive medical center from January 2019 to December 2021. After a sample size calculation performed by retrospectively analyzing our previous clinical data, we planned to recruit 170 patients in each group and 510 patients in total for the study., Participants/materials, Setting, Methods: Women aged ≥35 years undergoing IVF/ICSI treatment, receiving a non-pituitary down-regulation protocol, and with low risk of OHSS, were enrolled in this trial. On the trigger day, patients were randomized into three groups: hCG alone (who received 6000 IU of hCG), GnRHa alone (who received 0.2 mg of triptorelin) and dual trigger (who received 0.2 mg of triptorelin plus 2000 IU of hCG) groups. The primary outcome parameter was the number of retrieved oocytes. The secondary outcome parameters included, among others, the number and rates of mature oocytes, two pronuclei (2PN) embryos and good-quality embryos, as the rates of OHSS, clinical pregnancy, miscarriage and live birth., Main Results and the Role of Chance: There were no significant differences in the baseline demographic characteristics among the three groups. The dual trigger was associated with a higher retrieval rate (87.9% vs 84.1% in the hCG group, P = 0.031; 87.9% vs 83.6% in the GnRHa group, P = 0.014). However, the number of retrieved oocytes in the dual trigger group was comparable with those in the hCG group (4.08 ± 2.79 vs 3.60 ± 2.71, P = 0.080) and the GnRHa group (4.08 ± 2.79 vs 3.81 ± 3.38, P = 0.101); comparable data between the groups were also found when analyzing the number of 2PN embryos and the 2PN rate. In the dual trigger group, the numbers of good-quality embryos and viable embryos were both significantly higher than in the hCG group (1.74 ± 1.90 vs 1.19 ± 1.45, P = 0.016 and 2.19 ± 2.11 vs 1.56 ± 1.66, P = 0.008, respectively) and the GnRHa group (1.74 ± 1.90 vs 1.20 ± 1.67, P = 0.003 and 2.19 ± 2.11 vs 1.45 ± 1.75, P = 0.001, respectively). Pregnancy outcomes after fresh embryo transfer (ET) were comparable between the groups. The live birth rate and ongoing pregnancy rate after frozen ET in the dual trigger group were significantly higher than those in the GnRHa group (32.6% vs 14.1%, P = 0.007 and 34.8% vs 17.6%, P = 0.013, respectively), but not superior to those in the hCG group (32.6% vs 27.9%, P = 0.537 and 34.8% vs 27.9%, P = 0.358, respectively)., Limitations, Reasons for Caution: Women of advanced age are quite a heterogeneous population and overlap with poor ovarian responders or patients with diminished ovarian reserve. We therefore could not entirely exclude selection biases or confounding factors. This study was also not a double-blinded trial; the patients in the GnRHa and dual trigger groups could have been affected by the placebo effect., Wider Implications of the Findings: The results of this study suggest that in advanced-age women with low risk of OHSS, a dual trigger or even a single hCG trigger may be a better choice than a single GnRHa trigger., Study Funding/competing Interest(s): This study was supported by the Shanghai Municipal Health Commission of Science and Research Fund (20184Y0289). The authors declare no conflict of interest., Trial Registration Number: This trial was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR-1800016285)., Trial Registration Date: 24 May 2018., Date of First Patient’s Enrolment: 2 January 2019., (© The Author(s) 2022. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.)