Cover
Vol. 15 No. 2 (2025)

Published: December 31, 2025

Pages: 40-52

Articles

Comparison between Progesterone-Primed Protocol and GnRH Antagonist Protocol on Oocyte Yield and Fertilization Rate in PCOS Females

Zahraa Ali 1 Muayad Sraibet Abood Mufeda Ali Jwad
1High Institute of Infertility Diagnosis and Assisted Reproductive Technologies, Al-Nahrain University, Baghdad, Iraq.
History
  • Received: August 7, 2025
  • Accepted: November 30, 2025
  • Available Online: December 8, 2025
DOI

https://doi.org/10.28969/IJEIR.v15.i2.r4.25

Abstract

Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is a common cause of anovulatory infertility and is associated with an increased risk of premature luteinizing hormone (LH) surges during controlled ovarian stimulation. Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) using Medroxyprogesterone Acetate (MPA) has emerged as a convenient alternative to conventional gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocols. This study aimed to compare the effects of MPA-based PPOS and GnRH antagonist protocols on oocyte yield, maturation, fertilization, and embryo quality in women with PCOS undergoing ICSI . This prospective, randomized, open-label controlled clinical trial included 108 women with PCOS undergoing ICSI at the High Institute for Infertility Diagnosis and Assisted Reproductive Technologies, Al-Nahrain University, Baghdad, Iraq, between 2023 and 2024. Participants were allocated to an MPA-based PPOS group (n=49) or a flexible GnRH antagonist group (n=59). Oocyte yield, metaphase II (MII) oocytes, fertilization rate, embryo quality, ovarian sensitivity index (OSI), gonadotropin consumption, stimulation duration, and LH profiles were evaluated.No significant differences were observed in baseline characteristics or hormonal profiles between groups. The MPA group showed a numerically higher number of retrieved oocytes (20.65 ± 7.50 vs. 13.39 ± 4.41; p=0.083) and MII oocytes (15.10 ± 5.20 vs. 11.24 ± 4.12; p=0.09), although these differences were not statistically significant. Fertilization rates were comparable between groups (72.4 ± 10.6% vs. 71.2 ± 11.3%; p=0.68), as were embryo quality, OSI, gonadotropin consumption, and stimulation duration. Both protocols effectively suppressed premature LH surges without premature ovulation or cycle cancellation. MPA-based PPOS appears to be an effective and practical alternative to GnRH antagonist protocols for PCOS patients undergoing ICSI, providing comparable fertilization and embryological outcomes with effective LH suppression. Its oral administration and potential cost advantages may be particularly valuable in resource- limited ART settings.

Keywords

References

  1. Teede HJ, Misso ML, Costello MF, Dokras A, Laven J, Moran L, et al. Recommendations from the international evidence-based guideline for the assessment and management of polycystic ovary syndrome. Hum Reprod. 2018;33(9):1602– 18.
  2. Inhorn MC, Patrizio P. Infertility around the globe: new thinking on gender, reproductive technologies and global movements in the 21st century. Hum Reprod Update. 2015;21(4):411–26.
  3. Dumesic DA, Oberfield SE, Stener- Victorin E, Marshall JC, Laven JS, Legro RS. Scientific statement on the diagnostic criteria, epidemiology, pathophysiology, and molecular genetics of polycystic ovary syndrome. Endocr Rev. 2015;36(5):487–525.
  4. Chen X, Wu Y, Lin Y, Liu J, Li Y, Huang G. Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation vs. GnRH antagonist protocol in women with PCOS undergoing IVF: a randomized controlled trial. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2021;19(1):35.
  5. Zhou F, Lin Y, Li L, Xu Y, Wu Y, Luo X, et al. Application of Medroxyprogesterone Acetate in progestin-primed ovarian stimulation protocol for PCOS patients. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2021;37(5):408–12.
  6. Yarali H, Esinler I, Polat M, Bozdag G. Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation for fertility preservation in women with PCOS: a comparative study. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2021;38(2):445–52.
  7. Alviggi C, Conforti A, Esteves SC, Vallone R, Venturella R, Staiano S, et al. Understanding ovarian hypo-response to exogenous gonadotropin in ovarian stimulation and its new proposed marker—the Follicle-to-Oocyte Index (FOI). Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2018;9:589.
  8. Lu X, Hong Q, Sun L, Xu Y, Lu G, Lin G. Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation is effective and safe in women with PCOS: a meta-analysis. Reprod Sci. 2022;29(2):439– 49.
  9. Rochester JR, Willson CJ, Davis OK, Shamonki MI. Predicting ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome: OSI and estradiol response. Fertil Steril. 2020;113(5):1010–8.
  10. Zhu L, Xie W, Sun H, Xu Y, Qiao J. Optimal oocyte yield for maximizing live birth rates in IVF: a prospective study. Fertil Steril. 2020;114(2):305–12.
  11. Macedo A, Meseguer M, García-Herrero S, Pellicer A. Oocyte and embryo quality in ART: impact of stimulation protocol. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2021;38(12):3067–77.
  12. Roque M, Lattes K, Serra S, Sola I, Geber S, Carreras R, et al. Fresh embryo transfer versus frozen embryo transfer in in vitro fertilization cycles: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2013;99(1):156–62.
  13. Sunkara SK, Shah D. Assisted reproductive technology: cost-effectiveness and decision making. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2021;33(3):167–73.
  14. Vaiarelli A, Cimadomo D, Trabucco E, Vallefuoco R, Buffo L, Stoppa M, et al. Progestin primed ovarian stimulation protocol in IVF: effectiveness and safety in hyper- responders. Fertil Steril. 2020;114(5):1125– 32.
  15. Melo AS, Ferriani RA, Navarro PA. Treatment of infertility in women with polycystic ovary syndrome: approach based on the phenotype. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2021;70:108–17.