Comparing ART outcomes in women with endometriosis after GnRH agonist GnRH antagonist ovarian stimulation: a systematic review

Background: Endometriosis is an oestrogen-dependent disease that can cause subfertility in women who may require assisted reproductive technology (ART) to achieve their pregnancy goals. Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare ART outcomes in women with endometriosis following the long GnRH-...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Kevin K.W. Kuan, Sean Omoseni, Javier A. Tello
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: SAGE Publishing 2023-07-01
Series:Therapeutic Advances in Endocrinology and Metabolism
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1177/20420188231173325
_version_ 1797786915460612096
author Kevin K.W. Kuan
Sean Omoseni
Javier A. Tello
author_facet Kevin K.W. Kuan
Sean Omoseni
Javier A. Tello
author_sort Kevin K.W. Kuan
collection DOAJ
description Background: Endometriosis is an oestrogen-dependent disease that can cause subfertility in women who may require assisted reproductive technology (ART) to achieve their pregnancy goals. Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare ART outcomes in women with endometriosis following the long GnRH-agonist controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) protocol with those taking the GnRH-antagonist COS protocol. Data Sources and Methods: MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science were systematically searched in June 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing the long GnRH-agonist COS protocol and the GnRH-antagonist COS protocol in women with all stages/subtypes of endometriosis were included. Data were synthesized into comprehensive tables for systematic review. The Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) checklists were used for the risk of bias assessment of non-randomized studies and randomized studies, and all the included studies were deemed to have acceptable quality. Main Results: Eight studies (one RCT and seven observational) with 2695 patients (2761 cycles) were included. Most studies generally reported non-significant differences in clinical pregnancy or live birth rates regardless of the COS protocol used. However, the GnRH-agonist protocol may yield a higher total number of oocytes retrieved, especially mature oocytes. Conversely, the GnRH-antagonist protocol required a shorter COS duration and lower gonadotrophin dose. Adverse outcomes, such as rates of cycle cancellation and miscarriage, were similar between both COS protocols. Conclusion: Both the long GnRH-agonist and GnRH-antagonist COS protocols generally yield similar pregnancy outcomes. However, the long GnRH-agonist protocol may be associated with a higher cumulative pregnancy rate due to the higher number of retrieved oocytes available for cryopreservation. The underlying mechanisms of the two COS protocols on the female reproductive tract remain unclear. Clinicians should consider treatment costs, stage/subtype of endometriosis and pregnancy goals of their patients when selecting a GnRH analogue for COS. A well-powered RCT is needed to minimize the risk of bias and compare the risk for ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. Registration: This review was prospectively registered at PROSPERO under Registration No. CRD42022327604.
first_indexed 2024-03-13T01:14:34Z
format Article
id doaj.art-610396adda114774bb45143e62af50eb
institution Directory Open Access Journal
issn 2042-0196
language English
last_indexed 2024-03-13T01:14:34Z
publishDate 2023-07-01
publisher SAGE Publishing
record_format Article
series Therapeutic Advances in Endocrinology and Metabolism
spelling doaj.art-610396adda114774bb45143e62af50eb2023-07-05T11:33:48ZengSAGE PublishingTherapeutic Advances in Endocrinology and Metabolism2042-01962023-07-011410.1177/20420188231173325Comparing ART outcomes in women with endometriosis after GnRH agonist GnRH antagonist ovarian stimulation: a systematic reviewKevin K.W. KuanSean OmoseniJavier A. TelloBackground: Endometriosis is an oestrogen-dependent disease that can cause subfertility in women who may require assisted reproductive technology (ART) to achieve their pregnancy goals. Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare ART outcomes in women with endometriosis following the long GnRH-agonist controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) protocol with those taking the GnRH-antagonist COS protocol. Data Sources and Methods: MEDLINE, Embase and Web of Science were systematically searched in June 2022. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and observational studies comparing the long GnRH-agonist COS protocol and the GnRH-antagonist COS protocol in women with all stages/subtypes of endometriosis were included. Data were synthesized into comprehensive tables for systematic review. The Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN) checklists were used for the risk of bias assessment of non-randomized studies and randomized studies, and all the included studies were deemed to have acceptable quality. Main Results: Eight studies (one RCT and seven observational) with 2695 patients (2761 cycles) were included. Most studies generally reported non-significant differences in clinical pregnancy or live birth rates regardless of the COS protocol used. However, the GnRH-agonist protocol may yield a higher total number of oocytes retrieved, especially mature oocytes. Conversely, the GnRH-antagonist protocol required a shorter COS duration and lower gonadotrophin dose. Adverse outcomes, such as rates of cycle cancellation and miscarriage, were similar between both COS protocols. Conclusion: Both the long GnRH-agonist and GnRH-antagonist COS protocols generally yield similar pregnancy outcomes. However, the long GnRH-agonist protocol may be associated with a higher cumulative pregnancy rate due to the higher number of retrieved oocytes available for cryopreservation. The underlying mechanisms of the two COS protocols on the female reproductive tract remain unclear. Clinicians should consider treatment costs, stage/subtype of endometriosis and pregnancy goals of their patients when selecting a GnRH analogue for COS. A well-powered RCT is needed to minimize the risk of bias and compare the risk for ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. Registration: This review was prospectively registered at PROSPERO under Registration No. CRD42022327604.https://doi.org/10.1177/20420188231173325
spellingShingle Kevin K.W. Kuan
Sean Omoseni
Javier A. Tello
Comparing ART outcomes in women with endometriosis after GnRH agonist GnRH antagonist ovarian stimulation: a systematic review
Therapeutic Advances in Endocrinology and Metabolism
title Comparing ART outcomes in women with endometriosis after GnRH agonist GnRH antagonist ovarian stimulation: a systematic review
title_full Comparing ART outcomes in women with endometriosis after GnRH agonist GnRH antagonist ovarian stimulation: a systematic review
title_fullStr Comparing ART outcomes in women with endometriosis after GnRH agonist GnRH antagonist ovarian stimulation: a systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Comparing ART outcomes in women with endometriosis after GnRH agonist GnRH antagonist ovarian stimulation: a systematic review
title_short Comparing ART outcomes in women with endometriosis after GnRH agonist GnRH antagonist ovarian stimulation: a systematic review
title_sort comparing art outcomes in women with endometriosis after gnrh agonist gnrh antagonist ovarian stimulation a systematic review
url https://doi.org/10.1177/20420188231173325
work_keys_str_mv AT kevinkwkuan comparingartoutcomesinwomenwithendometriosisaftergnrhagonistgnrhantagonistovarianstimulationasystematicreview
AT seanomoseni comparingartoutcomesinwomenwithendometriosisaftergnrhagonistgnrhantagonistovarianstimulationasystematicreview
AT javieratello comparingartoutcomesinwomenwithendometriosisaftergnrhagonistgnrhantagonistovarianstimulationasystematicreview