Cover
Vol. 15 No. 1 (2025)

Published: June 30, 2025

Pages: 25-34

Articles

A comparison between short GnRH agonist and antagonist protocols in expected normal responder females following ICSI

Rabab Zahir Al-Yasiry 1 Rihab Abbas Ali 2 Muhjah Falah Hasan 1
1College of Medicine, University of Babylon, Iraq.
2College of Medicine, University of Karbala, Iraq.
History
  • Received: January 7, 2025
  • Accepted: March 30, 2025
  • Available Online: June 8, 2025
DOI

https://doi.org/10.28969/IJEIR.v15.i1.r3.25

Abstract

The selection of protocols in controlled ovarian stimulation during intracytoplasmic sperm injection affect the treatment outcomes. Both GnRH agonist and GnRH antagonist protocols are clinically utilized, therefore comparision of these protocols is important for the evaluation of their laboratory and clinical outcomes.To compares the short GnRH agonist and GnRH antagonist protocols effectiveness in expected normal responder females undergoing intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). Methods: A retrospective study was involved 60 women aged less than 35 with antimullerian hormone (AMH) more than 2.5 ng/ml. Participants women were assigned to either group1 short GnRH agonist protocol and group2 GnRH antagonist protocol. The outcomes measured including total oocyte, mature and immature oocytes, number and quality of embryo and pregnancy rate.The short GnRH agonist protocol group showed statistical significant benefit in oocyte yield (p- value 0.04), metaphase I (p- value 0.09), metaphase II (p- value 0.03), embryo number (p- value 0.04), embryo quality (p-value 0.01) and pregnancy rate in expected normal responder women compared to GnRHantagonist protocol. The short GnRHagonist protocol reveals favorable ICSI outcomes than antagonist protocol and may be better choice in expected normal responder women.

Keywords

References

  1. Harvey AJ, Willson BE, Surrey ES, Gardner DK. Ovarian stimulation protocols: impact on oocyte and endometrial quality and function. Fertility and Sterility. 2024 Aug 27. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2024.08.3 40 .
  2. Salemi F, Jambarsang S, Kheirkhah A, Salehi-Abargouei A, Ahmadnia Z, Hosseini HA, Lotfi M, Amer S. The best ovarian reserve marker to predict ovarian response following controlled ovarian hyperstimulation: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Systematic Reviews. 2024 Dec 18;13(1):303. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc- nd/4.0 /.
  3. ABBAS HH, AL-JARAH DM, ABBAS HH, CHIAD ZJ. Short Agonist and Antagonist Protocols in Normoresponding Patients Undergoing ICSI, a comparative study.
  4. Salehi F, Dunfield L, Phillips KP, Krewski D, Vanderhyden BC. Risk factors for ovarian cancer: an overview with emphasis on hormonal factors. Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health, Part B. 2008 Mar 20;11(3-4):301-21. https://doi.org/10.1080/10937400701876095.
  5. Lobo R, Soerdal T, Ekerhovd E, Cohlen B, Porcu E, Schenk M, Shufaro Y, Smeenk J, Suerdieck MB, Pinton P, Pinborg A. BEYOND: a randomized controlled trial comparing efficacy and safety of individualized follitropin delta dosing in a GnRH agonist versus antagonist protocol during the first ovarian stimulation cycle. Human Reproduction. 2024 Jul;39(7):1481- 94. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deae092 .
  6. Di Guardo F, De Rijdt S, Racca A, Drakopoulos P, Mackens S, Strypstein L, Tournaye H, De Vos M, Blockeel C. Impact of GnRH antagonist pretreatment on oocyte yield after ovarian stimulation: A retrospective analysis. Plos one. 2024 Oct 7;19(10):e0308666. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0324687 .
  7. Ge L, Li Y, Zhou J, Zhao X, Chen X, Wang W, Li Z, Ge P, Cui L. Effect of different treatment protocols on in vitro fertilisation/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI) outcomes in adenomyosis women: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMJ open. 2024 Jul 1;14(7):e077025.
  8. Prapas Y, Petousis S, Dagklis T, Panagiotidis Y, Papatheodorou A, Assunta I, Prapas N. GnRH antagonist versus long GnRH agonist protocol in poor IVF responders: a randomized clinical trial. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology. 2013 Jan 1;166(1):43-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2012.09.008 .
  9. Al-Inany H, Aboulghar M. GnRH antagonist in assisted reproduction: a Cochrane review. Human Reproduction. 2002 Apr 1;17(4):874-85. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/17.4.874 .
  10. Olivennes F, Cunha-Filho JS, Fanchin R, Bouchard P, Frydman R. The use of GnRH antagonists in ovarian stimulation. Human reproduction update. 2002 May 1;8(3):279- 99. https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/8.3.279 .
  11. Mohamed A. Behery. Different Controlled Ovarian Stimulation Protocols and their Effects on ICSI Outcomes. Assuit Medical Journal. 2015; 13 (3):109-119.
  12. Mohamed KA, Davies WA, Allsopp J, Lashen H. Agonist “flare-up” versus antagonist in the management of poor responders undergoing in vitro fertilization treatment. Fertility and sterility. 2005 Feb 1;83(2):331-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2004.07.9 63 .
  13. Orvieto R, Venetis CA, Fatemi HM, D’Hooghe T, Fischer R, Koloda Y, Horton M, Grynberg M, Longobardi S, Esteves SC, Sunkara SK. Optimising follicular development, pituitary suppression, triggering and luteal phase support during assisted reproductive technology: a Delphi consensus. Frontiers in endocrinology. 2021 May 10;12:675670. https://doi.org/10.3389/fendo.2021.675670 .
  14. Mahmood A, Tan L. Gonadotropin- Releasing Hormone (GnRH) Agonist Protocol Improves Pregnancy Outcomes During In Vitro Fertilization (IVF) and Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection (ICSI) Treatment in Young Infertile Women: A Retrospective Study. Cureus. 2024 Jun 2;16(6). DOI: 10.7759/cureus.61554.