Fertility and Sterility
Volume 93, Issue 2 , Pages 360-363, 15 January 2010

A comparison of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist and GnRH agonist flare protocols for poor responders undergoing in vitro fertilization

Presented at the 4th Annual Meeting of the New England Fertility Society, Newport, Rhode Island, April 7–8, 2006.

  • Inna Berin, M.D.
  • ,
  • Daniel E. Stein, M.D.
  • ,
  • Martin D. Keltz, M.D.

      Affiliations

    • Corresponding Author InformationReprint requests: Martin D. Keltz, M.D., Director, Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Department of OB/GYN, St. Luke's-Roosevelt Hospital Center, 1000 10th Avenue, New York, New York 10019 (FAX: 212-523-8348).

Division of Reproductive Endocrinology and Infertility, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, St. Luke's-Roosevelt Hospital Center, Columbia University College of Physicians and Surgeons, New York, New York

Received 15 September 2008; received in revised form 15 October 2008; accepted 4 November 2008. published online 07 January 2009.

Objective

To compare stimulation profiles, pregnancy, and live birth rates in poor responders during in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles using either a gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist (cetrorelix) or a GnRH agonist flare protocol (leuprolide).

Design

Retrospective chart review.

Setting

A university-affiliated IVF program.

Patient(s)

Women designated as poor responders based on a prior stimulation cycle or baseline follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) level of >10 mIU/mL, who needed at least 375 IU of starting daily gonadotropins in the study cycle.

Intervention(s)

Administration of GnRH agonist flare or GnRH antagonist protocol.

Main Outcome Measure(s)

Clinical pregnancy rate, live birth rate.

Result(s)

For 68 GnRH antagonist and 45 GnRH agonist flare cycles, the groups were similar with respect to age (38.8 versus 38.6 years) and basal FSH concentration (8.33 versus 8.65 mIU/mL). No statistically significant differences between the protocol types were noted in peak estradiol levels, amount of gonadotropins used, number of oocytes obtained, or embryos transferred. The pregnancy rates (40% versus 45.2%) and live birth rates (27.7% versus 31.7%) in the GnRH antagonist and flare groups, respectively, were similar.

Conclusion(s)

We achieved excellent and comparable pregnancy and live birth rates in poor responders of advanced reproductive age with the use of either GnRH antagonist or flare protocol.

Key Words: GnRH antagonist, GnRH agonist, flare protocol, poor responder

To access this article, please choose from the options below

Login to an existing account or Register a new account.

  • Purchase this article for 31.50 USD (You must login/register to purchase this article)

    Online access for 24 hours. The PDF version can be downloaded as your permanent record.

  • Subscribe to this title

    Get unlimited online access to this article and all other articles in this title 24/7 for one year.

  • Claim access now

    For current subscribers with Society Membership or Account Number.

  • Visit SciVerse ScienceDirect to see if you have access via your institution.
 

 I.B. has nothing to disclose. D.E.S. has nothing to disclose. M.D.K. has nothing to disclose.

PII: S0015-0282(08)04550-0

doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.11.007

Fertility and Sterility
Volume 93, Issue 2 , Pages 360-363, 15 January 2010