Comparisons of GnRH antagonist protocol versus GnRH agonist long protocol in patients with normal ovarian reserve: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH-ant) protocol and gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) long protocol in patients with normal ovarian reserve. METHODS:We searched the PubMed (1992-2016), Cochrane Library (1999-2016), Web...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Ruolin Wang, Shouren Lin, Yong Wang, Weiping Qian, Liang Zhou
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science (PLoS) 2017-01-01
Series:PLoS ONE
Online Access:http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC5402978?pdf=render
id doaj-bf2d900eaa6c405ca2da9a15bf2d3d06
record_format Article
spelling doaj-bf2d900eaa6c405ca2da9a15bf2d3d062020-11-24T21:52:04ZengPublic Library of Science (PLoS)PLoS ONE1932-62032017-01-01124e017598510.1371/journal.pone.0175985Comparisons of GnRH antagonist protocol versus GnRH agonist long protocol in patients with normal ovarian reserve: A systematic review and meta-analysis.Ruolin WangShouren LinYong WangWeiping QianLiang ZhouOBJECTIVE:To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH-ant) protocol and gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) long protocol in patients with normal ovarian reserve. METHODS:We searched the PubMed (1992-2016), Cochrane Library (1999-2016), Web of Science (1950-2016), Chinese Biomedical Database (CBM, 1979-2016), and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI, 1994-2016). Any randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared GnRH-ant protocol and GnRH-a long protocol in patients with normal ovarian reserve were included, and data were extracted independently by two reviewers. The meta-analysis was performed by Revman 5.3 software. RESULTS:Twenty-nine RCTs (6399 patients) were included in this meta-analysis. Stimulation days (mean difference (MD) [95% confidence interval (CI)] = -0.8 [-1.36, -0.23], P = 0.006), gonadotrophin (Gn) dosage (MD [95% CI] = -3.52 [-5.56, -1.48], P = 0.0007), estradiol (E2) level on the day of human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG) administration (MD [95% CI] = -365.49 [-532.93, -198.05], P<0.0001), the number of oocytes retrieved (MD [95% CI] = -1.41 [-1.84, -0.99], P<0.00001), the embryos obtained (MD [95% CI] = -0.99 [-1.38, -0.59], P<0.00001), incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) (OR [95% CI] = 0.69 [0.57, 0.83], P<0.0001) were statistically significantly lower in GnRH-ant protocol than GnRH-a long protocol. However, the clinical pregnancy rate (OR [95% CI] = 0.90 [0.80, 1.01], P = 0.08), ongoing pregnancy rate (OR [95% CI] = 0.88 [0.77, 1.00], P = 0.05), live birth rate (OR [95% CI] = 0.95 [0.74, 1.09], P = 0.27), miscarriage rate (OR [95% CI] = 0.98 [0.69, 1.40], P = 0.93), and cycle cancellation rate (OR [95% CI] = 0.86 [0.52, 1.44], P = 0.57) showed no significant differences between the two groups. CONCLUSION:GnRH-ant protocol substantially decreased the incidence of OHSS without influencing the pregnancy rate and live birth rate compared to GnRH-a long protocol among patients with normal ovarian reserve.http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC5402978?pdf=render
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Ruolin Wang
Shouren Lin
Yong Wang
Weiping Qian
Liang Zhou
spellingShingle Ruolin Wang
Shouren Lin
Yong Wang
Weiping Qian
Liang Zhou
Comparisons of GnRH antagonist protocol versus GnRH agonist long protocol in patients with normal ovarian reserve: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
PLoS ONE
author_facet Ruolin Wang
Shouren Lin
Yong Wang
Weiping Qian
Liang Zhou
author_sort Ruolin Wang
title Comparisons of GnRH antagonist protocol versus GnRH agonist long protocol in patients with normal ovarian reserve: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
title_short Comparisons of GnRH antagonist protocol versus GnRH agonist long protocol in patients with normal ovarian reserve: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
title_full Comparisons of GnRH antagonist protocol versus GnRH agonist long protocol in patients with normal ovarian reserve: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
title_fullStr Comparisons of GnRH antagonist protocol versus GnRH agonist long protocol in patients with normal ovarian reserve: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
title_full_unstemmed Comparisons of GnRH antagonist protocol versus GnRH agonist long protocol in patients with normal ovarian reserve: A systematic review and meta-analysis.
title_sort comparisons of gnrh antagonist protocol versus gnrh agonist long protocol in patients with normal ovarian reserve: a systematic review and meta-analysis.
publisher Public Library of Science (PLoS)
series PLoS ONE
issn 1932-6203
publishDate 2017-01-01
description OBJECTIVE:To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH-ant) protocol and gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRH-a) long protocol in patients with normal ovarian reserve. METHODS:We searched the PubMed (1992-2016), Cochrane Library (1999-2016), Web of Science (1950-2016), Chinese Biomedical Database (CBM, 1979-2016), and China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI, 1994-2016). Any randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared GnRH-ant protocol and GnRH-a long protocol in patients with normal ovarian reserve were included, and data were extracted independently by two reviewers. The meta-analysis was performed by Revman 5.3 software. RESULTS:Twenty-nine RCTs (6399 patients) were included in this meta-analysis. Stimulation days (mean difference (MD) [95% confidence interval (CI)] = -0.8 [-1.36, -0.23], P = 0.006), gonadotrophin (Gn) dosage (MD [95% CI] = -3.52 [-5.56, -1.48], P = 0.0007), estradiol (E2) level on the day of human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG) administration (MD [95% CI] = -365.49 [-532.93, -198.05], P<0.0001), the number of oocytes retrieved (MD [95% CI] = -1.41 [-1.84, -0.99], P<0.00001), the embryos obtained (MD [95% CI] = -0.99 [-1.38, -0.59], P<0.00001), incidence of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) (OR [95% CI] = 0.69 [0.57, 0.83], P<0.0001) were statistically significantly lower in GnRH-ant protocol than GnRH-a long protocol. However, the clinical pregnancy rate (OR [95% CI] = 0.90 [0.80, 1.01], P = 0.08), ongoing pregnancy rate (OR [95% CI] = 0.88 [0.77, 1.00], P = 0.05), live birth rate (OR [95% CI] = 0.95 [0.74, 1.09], P = 0.27), miscarriage rate (OR [95% CI] = 0.98 [0.69, 1.40], P = 0.93), and cycle cancellation rate (OR [95% CI] = 0.86 [0.52, 1.44], P = 0.57) showed no significant differences between the two groups. CONCLUSION:GnRH-ant protocol substantially decreased the incidence of OHSS without influencing the pregnancy rate and live birth rate compared to GnRH-a long protocol among patients with normal ovarian reserve.
url http://europepmc.org/articles/PMC5402978?pdf=render
work_keys_str_mv AT ruolinwang comparisonsofgnrhantagonistprotocolversusgnrhagonistlongprotocolinpatientswithnormalovarianreserveasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT shourenlin comparisonsofgnrhantagonistprotocolversusgnrhagonistlongprotocolinpatientswithnormalovarianreserveasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT yongwang comparisonsofgnrhantagonistprotocolversusgnrhagonistlongprotocolinpatientswithnormalovarianreserveasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT weipingqian comparisonsofgnrhantagonistprotocolversusgnrhagonistlongprotocolinpatientswithnormalovarianreserveasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
AT liangzhou comparisonsofgnrhantagonistprotocolversusgnrhagonistlongprotocolinpatientswithnormalovarianreserveasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis
_version_ 1725877029331533824