Skip to main content
Download PDF

Additional single dose GnRH agonist during luteal phase support may improve live birth rate in GnRHa-HRT frozen–thawed embryo transfer cycle: a retrospective cohort study

BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth volume 23, Article number: 174 (2023) Cite this article

Abstract

Background

GnRH agonist (GnRHa) has been reported to have direct effects and functional roles in the endometrium and embryos. Several meta-analyses have shown that GnRHa administration in the luteal phase improved the live birth rate or pregnancy rate in both fresh and frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles. The aim of this study was to investigate whether luteal GnRHa administration could also improve in vitro fertilization (IVF) outcomes in patients undergoing hormone replacement therapy (HRT) cycles with GnRHa suppression.

Methods

The retrospective cohort study included a total of 350 patients undergoing GnRHa-HRT FET cycles. The study group included 179 patients receiving an additional single dose of GnRHa in the luteal phase following embryo transfer. A total of 171 patients in the control group did not receive luteal GnRHa. The baseline and cycle characteristics and reproductive outcomes were compared between the two groups.

Results

Baseline and cycle characteristics were similar between the two groups, except lower AMH levels were found in the luteal GnRHa group than in the control group. The luteal GnRHa group had a significantly higher ongoing pregnancy rate and live birth rate than the control group. The multivariate analysis revealed that luteal GnRHa administration was positively associated with ongoing pregnancy (OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.20–3.47, P = 0.008) and live birth (OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.20–3.45, P = 0.009). When the subgroup of patients with recurrent implantation failure was analyzed, the multivariate analysis also showed that luteal GnRHa administration had beneficial effects on ongoing pregnancy (OR 4.55, 95% CI 1.69–12.30, P = 0.003) and live birth (OR 4.30, 95% CI 1.59–11.65, P = 0.004).

Conclusions

Our data suggest that the addition of one luteal dose of GnRHa may improve the live birth rate in patients undergoing the GnRHa-HRT protocol.

Peer Review reports

Introduction

Embryo transfer (ET) is a critical step in assisted reproductive technology (ART) treatment. Frozen–thawed embryo transfer (FET) has become an effective and popular approach in ART mainly because of the development of vitrification [1]. FET cycles were associated with lower ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome risk and reduced risk of low birth weight, preterm birth, and small for gestational age infants [2, 3]. Among the endometrial preparation methods for FET, the hormone replacement therapy (HRT) protocol is quite popular because of its flexibility and convenience. However, endometrial receptivity may be impaired in the HRT cycle because of medication use [4].

Successful implantation requires good-quality embryos, receptive endometrium and synchronized embryo–endometrial crosstalk. The gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) pathway plays an important role in the hypothalamus-pituitary-gonadal axis of reproduction [5, 6]. Both GnRH and GnRH receptors (GnRH-R) are expressed not only in the hypothalamic pituitary but also in the endometrium and embryos; their expression reaches the highest levels at the secretory-phase endometrium and at the stage of expanded blastocyst [7,8,9,10]. Therefore, GnRH agonists (GnRHa) may have direct effects and functional roles in the endometrium and embryos. Indeed, GnRH has been reported to enhance endometrium receptivity and embryo development [11,12,13,14]. Several systematic reviews and meta-analyses indicated that adding GnRHa to progesterone significantly improved the ongoing pregnancy rate and live birth rate compared with using progesterone alone for luteal phase support in fresh embryo transfer (fET) cycles [15,16,17,18]. Furthermore, a systematic review and meta-analysis including 20 studies and 5497 patients demonstrated that GnRHa administration in the luteal phase boosted the clinical pregnancy rate in both fET and FET cycles, and the beneficial effect was similar between the fET and FET cycles [19].

GnRHa downregulation combined with HRT cycles has been increasingly used in recent years. Although the efficacy of GnRHa pretreatment is controversial [20, 21], a recent systematic review and meta-analysis of 27 articles with 14,152 patients reported that HRT cycles with GnRHa suppression were associated with an increased live birth rate and clinical pregnancy rate compared to those without GnRHa suppression [22]. Additionally, some studies have demonstrated that GnRHa pretreatment in HRT cycles may have a beneficial effect on specific groups, such as adenomyosis [23, 24], recurrent implantation failure (RIF) [25, 26] and thin endometrium [27]. We wondered whether additional administration of GnRHa during the luteal phase still takes effect in the GnRHa-HRT protocol. However, to date, no studies have investigated this issue. Thus, we designed this retrospective cohort study to assess the effects of the luteal-phase administration of single-dose GnRHa on reproductive outcomes in patients undergoing GnRHa-HRT FET cycles.

Materials and methods

Study design and participants

This retrospective cohort study was performed at the Reproductive Medical Center of Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital from January 2020 to September 2021. The study was approved by the Institutional Review Board of Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital (reference number of institutional review board: KSVGH22-CT12-14). Because of its retrospective design, the requirement for consent was waived by the Institutional Review Board of Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital. All patient data were collected from electronic medical records and in vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment sheets. Patients who received the first IVF-FET cycle in our reproductive medical center were included in this study. The exclusion criteria were as follows: (1) patients whose age was over 46 years old, (2) patients whose BMI was over 30 kg/m2 or less 18 kg/m2, (3) patients with uterine factor infertility, (4) patients who did not undergo GnRHa-HRT cycles, (5) patients who had thin endometrium (< 8 mm) after estradiol priming, (6) patients who received preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A), (7) patients who were oocyte recipients, (8) patients whose husbands underwent testicular sperm extraction (TESE) and (9) patients who were lost to follow-up. Finally, 350 patients undergoing the GnRHa-HRT protocol were identified and divided into the luteal GnRHa group (n = 179) and the control group (n = 171). The addition of luteal GnRHa administration was determined according to the patients’ consideration and preference after full consultation provided by a doctor. In the luteal GnRHa group, a single dose of GnRHa (Lupro 2 mg, Nang Kuang Pharmaceutical Co, Ltd., Tainan, Taiwan) was injected subcutaneously 2 hours after ET. The study flow chart is shown in Fig. 1.

Fig. 1
figure 1

Study flow chart. IVF, in vitro fertilization; ICSI, intracytoplasmic sperm injection; FET, frozen–thawed embryo transfer; BMI, body mass index; GnRHa, gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist; HRT, hormonal replacement therapy; PGT-A, preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy; TESE, testicular sperm extraction

Full size image

Endometrial preparation and frozen–thawed embryo transfer

All participants included in this study underwent FET cycles using the GnRHa-HRT protocol. A single injection of 3.75 mg long-acting GnRHa (Leuplin Depot, Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited, Yamaguchi, Japan) was given subcutaneously on menstruation cycle Day 2 or 3 after a thin endometrium (< 5 mm) was confirmed by transvaginal sonography. Twenty-eight to thirty days later, when the transvaginal sonography confirmed the presence of a thin endometrium (< 5 mm), endometrial preparation was commenced with daily oral estradiol 6-8 mg (Ediol, Synmosa Biopharma Corporation, Hsinchu County, Taiwan) and estradiol gel (Oestrogel gel, Besins, Drogenbos, Belgium). After consecutive administration for 14 days, a transvaginal ultrasound scan was performed to evaluate the endometrial thickness. If endometrial thickness was less than 8 mm, the dosage of estrogen was increased, and the medication duration was extended. If the endometrial thickness was still not sufficient after 20 days of estrogen administration, the cycle was cancelled. When the endometrial thickness reached at least 8 mm, luteal phase support was initiated using daily intravaginal gel 90 mg (Crinone 8% gel, Merck Serono, Hertfordshire, UK), daily oral dydrogesterone 30 mg (Duphaston, Abbott, Olst, the Netherlands) and intramuscular injection of progesterone 125 mg (Progeston Depot, Tafong Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., Changhua City, Taiwan) twice a week.

A non-selective freeze-all strategy was introduced in our reproductive medical center. All embryos were cryopreserved using the vitrification technique. The cleavage-stage embryos and blastocysts were thawed and transferred on the 4th or 6th day after administration of progesterone, respectively. Day 3 embryo quality was evaluated according to the criteria from the Istanbul consensus workshop [28]. The percentage of fragmentation, the evenness of each blastomere and whether multinucleation was present were assessed to grade day 3 embryos as Grade 1 to Grade 3. Good-quality day 3 embryos were defined as 6-10 cells with Grade 2 (10-25% fragmentation, equal-sized blastomeres in the majority of cells and no multinucleation); top-quality Day 3 embryos were defined as 6-10 cells with Grade 1 (< 10% fragmentation, equal-sized blastomeres and no multinucleation) in this study. Day 5 embryo quality was assessed based on the Gardner and Schoolcraft scoring system. The degree of expansion (Grade 1-6), inner cell mass morphology (Grade A-C) and trophectoderm morphology (Grade A-C) were used to grade day 5 embryos. Good-quality day 5 embryos were defined as Grade 3BB; top-quality Day 3 embryos were defined as Grade 3AA in this study. ET was carried out under the guidance of transabdominal ultrasound. In the luteal GnRHa group, a single dose of GnRHa (Lupro 2 mg, Nang Kuang Pharmaceutical Co, Ltd., Tainan, Taiwan) was injected subcutaneously 2 hours after ET. Once pregnancy was achieved, luteal support was continued until 10–12 gestational weeks.

Outcome measures

The primary outcome was live birth rate. The secondary outcomes included the clinical pregnancy rate, implantation rate and ongoing pregnancy rate. Biochemical pregnancy was confirmed by elevated serum β-human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) levels (> 25 IU/L) at 14 days after ET. Clinical pregnancy was determined by visualization of fetal cardiac activity on transvaginal ultrasound at 6–7 weeks of gestation. Implantation rate was defined as number of intrauterine sac with a fetal heartbeat determined by transvaginal ultrasound by number of transferred embryos. A viable pregnancy beyond 12 weeks of gestation was considered ongoing pregnancy. Live birth was defined as the delivery of a viable fetus past 24 weeks of gestation. A loss of pregnancy before 24 weeks of gestation was regarded as miscarriage. Miscarriage was further divided into early miscarriage (≤ 12 weeks of gestation) and late miscarriage (> 12 weeks of gestation).

Statistical analysis

The Kolmogorov–Smirnov test was used to test the normal distribution of continuous variables. Quantitative variables of normally distributed data, large enough samples, or both were assessed using Student’s t test; otherwise, Mann–Whitney U test was applied. Chi-squared test or Fisher’s exact test was used for comparing categorical data. Multivariable logistic regression was used to identify the independent effects of additional luteal GnRHa on live birth and ongoing pregnancy in all populations and patients with RIF after adjusting for age, body mass index, infertility duration, types of infertility, basal follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH), endometrial thickness, day of ET, number of transferred embryos and quality of transferred embryos. The results are shown as the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). A two-tailed value of P <  0.05 was considered statistically significant. Data processing and statistical analysis were carried out using IBM SPSS Statistics version 20.0 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA).

Sample size calculation

The software G*Power 3.1 was used to calculate sample size. Live birth rate as the primary outcome was used to calculate sample size. Chi-squared test for independent samples was selected for the calculation. Live birth rate for the GnRHa-HRT protocol and HRT protocol were estimated to be 40 and 25%, respectively. With an alpha error of 0.05 and a power of 80%, it was postulated that the number of cases required for each group would be 152.

Results

As shown in Fig. 1, a total of 1376 IVF/ICSI cycles were conducted from January 2020 until September 2021 in our reproductive medical center. During the period, 572 patients with their first IVF-FET cycle in our reproductive medical center were identified. Among the 572 patients, there were 16 patients who were older than 46 years old, 32 patients whose BMI was over 30 kg/m2 or less 18 kg/m2, 32 patients with uterine factor infertility, 98 patients who did not undergo GnRHa-HRT cycles, 9 patients who had thin endometrium (< 8 mm) after estradiol priming, 28 patients who received PGT-A, 2 patients who were oocyte recipients, 4 patients whose husbands underwent TESE, and 1 patient who was lost to follow-up. Those patients were excluded from the study. The remaining 350 patients with the GnRHa-HRT protocol were included and divided into the luteal GnRHa group (n = 179) and the control group (n = 171).

The baseline characteristics of the study population are summarized in Table 1. There were no significant differences between the two groups regarding age, body mass index, infertility duration, previous IVF attempts, infertility types and causes. Furthermore, basal FSH levels in the two groups were similar. However, lower AMH levels were found in the luteal GnRHa group than in the control group.

Table 1 Baseline characteristics of patients undergoing the GnRHa-HRT protocol with or without luteal GnRHa administration
Full size table

As shown in Table 2, there were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of endometrial thickness, ET day, number of transferred embryos, percentage of ≥ one top-quality embryo transferred and quality of transferred embryos. A higher biochemical pregnancy rate (64.8% vs. 46.2%, P <  0.001), clinical pregnancy rate (55.3% vs. 40.4%, P = 0.005), implantation rate (33.4 ± 36.6% vs. 23.8 ± 33.6%, P = 0.012), ongoing pregnancy rate (50.8% vs. 35.1%, P = 0.003) and live birth rate (49.2% vs. 32.7%, P = 0.002) were observed in the luteal GnRHa group than in the control group. However, no significant difference in early and late miscarriage rate was observed between the two groups.

Table 2 Cycle characteristics of patients undergoing the GnRHa-HRT protocol with or without luteal GnRHa administration
Full size table

In Table 3, a binary logistic regression analysis was performed to assess the effects of additional luteal GnRH agonist in GnRHa-HRT cycles on ongoing pregnancy and live birth. Confounding parameters such as age, body mass index, infertility duration, types of infertility, basal FSH, AMH, endometrial thickness, day of ET, number of transferred embryos and quality of transferred embryos were included in the analysis. The multivariate analysis showed that the addition of a luteal GnRH agonist in GnRHa-HRT cycles had beneficial effects on the ongoing pregnancy rate (OR 2.04, 95% CI 1.20–3.47, P = 0.008) and live birth rate (OR 2.03, 95% CI 1.20–3.45, P = 0.009). Moreover, age and day of ET were independent factors that could affect the ongoing pregnancy rate and live birth rate.

Table 3 Analyses of factors affecting the ongoing pregnancy rate and live birth rate using logistic regression
Full size table

We then attempted to investigate the effects of additional luteal GnRHa in patients with RIF. RIF was defined as failure to achieve a clinical pregnancy after at least three IVF or ICSI treatments with transfer of at least one good-quality embryo per transfer or transfer of 10 good-quality embryos according to a previous study [29]. As presented in Table 4, basal characteristics, including age, body mass index, infertility duration, infertility types, basal FSH and AMH, as well as cycle characteristics, including endometrial thickness, ET day, number of transferred embryos, percentage of ≥ one top-quality embryo transferred and quality of transferred embryos, were comparable between the two groups. Compared to the control group, the luteal GnRHa group had a significantly higher biochemical pregnancy rate (63.9% vs. 40.3%, P = 0.005), clinical pregnancy rate (54.2% vs. 30.6%, P = 0.004), ongoing pregnancy rate (47.2% vs. 23.6%, P = 0.004) and live birth rate (44.4% vs. 22.2%, P = 0.005). However, implantation rate and miscarriage rate were similar between the two groups. Furthermore, we performed a stratified analysis based on the day of embryo transfer and found that live birth rate was significantly higher in the luteal GnRHa group than in the control group both in the day 3 (38.5%% vs. 22.9%, P = 0.018) and day 5 (64.0%% vs. 45.3%, P = 0.022) embryo transfer (Supplementary Table 1).

Table 4 Subgroup analysis of RIF patients undergoing the GnRHa-HRT protocol with or without luteal GnRHa administration
Full size table

As shown in Table 5, a binary logistic regression analysis was conducted to analyze the effects of additional luteal GnRHa in GnRHa-HRT cycles on ongoing pregnancy and live birth in the RIF subgroup. Age, body mass index, infertility duration, types of infertility, basal FSH, AMH, endometrial thickness, day of ET, number of transferred embryos and quality of transferred embryos were considered confounding factors in this analysis. The multivariate analysis revealed increased odds of ongoing pregnancy (OR 4.55, 95% CI 1.69–12.30, P = 0.003) and live birth (OR 4.30, 95% CI 1.59–11.65, P = 0.004) when luteal GnRHa was added in RIF patients undergoing the GnRHa-HRT protocol. In addition, age was negatively associated with ongoing pregnancy and live birth.

Table 5 Analyses of factors affecting the ongoing pregnancy rate and live birth rate in RIF patients using logistic regression
Full size table

Discussion

This retrospective cohort study is the first to explore the possible effects of administration of single-dose GnRHa in luteal phase support on IVF outcomes in patients who underwent GnRHa-HRT cycles, and the results showed that additional luteal GnRHa was associated with a higher ongoing pregnancy rate and live birth rate. Moreover, the multivariate analysis revealed a 2.04-fold increase in the possibility of ongoing pregnancy (95% CI 1.20–3.47, P = 0.008) and a 2.03-fold increase in the possibility of live birth (95% CI 1.20–3.45, P = 0.009) when single-dose GnRHa was added to luteal phase support in patients receiving HRT cycles with GnRHa suppression. Luteal GnRHa administration potentially takes its effects in two ways: induction of endogenous pituitary gonadotropin release and in situ activation of GnRH-R in the endometrium and embryos. However, different from the HRT protocol, GnRHa-HRT protocol downregulates the pituitary and will inhibit pituitary gonadotropin release induced by luteal GnRHa administration. Therefore, luteal GnRHa supplementation in the GnRHa-HRT protocol only takes its effects through activation of the locally expressed GnRH/GnRH-R system in the endometrium and embryos.

GnRH analogs may have the potential to act on the endometrium and early stages of embryos. Both GnRH and GnRH-R have been reported to be expressed in both the epithelium and the stroma of the endometrium and reach the highest levels in the secretory phase of the menstrual cycle [7, 8, 30, 31], suggesting that the GnRH–GnRH-R pathway has functional roles in endometrium receptivity and implantation. GnRHa therapy may enhance the expression of endometrial integrin αvβ3, an adhesive molecule, and implantation-related factors, such as HOXA10 and LIF, in humans [11, 12] and mice [32, 33]. Furthermore, in a study of human decidual stromal cells, GnRH has been found to be able to modulate matrix metalloproteinases (MMPs) and their endogenous inhibitors, tissue-specific inhibitor of matrix metalloproteinases (TIMPs) [34], both of which are associated with cyclic remodeling of the endometrium and decidualization [35]. GnRHa has also been demonstrated to directly stimulate cell invasion and migration of human decidual endometrial stromal cells, a key process of embryo implantation and pregnancy programming [36]. These supported that GnRHa may facilitate endometrial receptivity and implantation. Moreover, both GnRH and GnRH-R have been shown to be present in human, mouse and porcine preimplantation embryos [9, 10, 13]. The levels of GnRH and GnRH-R significantly increased at the early blastocyst stage and reached their highest levels at the expanded blastocyst stage [10, 14]. In addition, the expression of GnRH and GnRH-R was detected in both the inner cell mass and trophectoderm cells of blastocysts [14]. These results implied that the GnRH–GnRH-R pathway could be a potential modulator of early embryo development. In animal models, treatment with GnRHa in culture medium can promote embryo development and inhibit apoptosis. In contrast, treatment with a GnRH antagonist suppressed embryo development and induced apoptosis via the intrinsic mitochondrial pathway, but the adverse effects could be reversed by cotreatment with GnRHa [10, 13, 14]. In addition, treatment with GnRH antagonist in mouse blastocysts significantly reduced the levels of EGF and IGF-II [14], which have been reported to be associated with embryo development and inhibition of apoptosis in blastocysts [37, 38]. In a study of human extravillous cytotrophoblasts, GnRHa was suggested to have the capacity to promote trophoblast invasion by regulating the expression of urokinase-type plasminogen activator (uPA) and plasminogen activator inhibitor (PAI-1) [39]. Additionally, GnRHa could regulate the synthesis and secretion of hCG in the preimplantation embryo and placenta [40, 41]. This suggests that GnRHa may be involved in early embryo development.

Taken together, GnRH analogs play an important role in the establishment of receptive endometrium and the development of peri-implantation embryos, by which GnRHa could facilitate successful implantation and pregnancy. However, more human studies are required to confirm the effects of GnRHa on the endometrium and embryos. A Cochrane meta-analysis including 10 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 2861 women demonstrated that live birth or ongoing pregnancy rates were higher in the progesterone plus GnRHa group than in the progesterone-only group [15]. Several other systematic reviews and meta-analyses reported similar results [16,17,18]. Furthermore, a systematic review and network meta-analysis of 89 RCTs with 29,625 women was performed to compare the effectiveness and safety of various methods of luteal phase support and showed that the addition of GnRHa to progesterone significantly improved the live birth rate compared to progesterone alone [42]. Another systematic review and network meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the effectiveness and safety of multiple-dose versus single-dose GnRHa protocols for luteal phase support in patients undergoing IVF/ICSI cycles. The results indicated that the multiple-dose GnRHa protocol might be the best strategy for improving the live birth rate and clinical pregnancy rate [43]. Nevertheless, these meta-analyses only included patients undergoing fET cycles. In terms of FET cycles, a systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrated that GnRHa administration in the luteal phase improved the clinical pregnancy rate in FET cycles, and the beneficial effect was similar to fresh cycles [19]. These studies supported our results in this article. However, a recent RCT including a total of 287 HRT–FET cycles showed no significant benefit in live birth rate and clinical pregnancy rate by administering two GnRHa boluses [44]. Therefore, more large-scale RCTs are needed to verify the beneficial effects of luteal GnRHa administration on IVF outcomes, especially in FET cycles.

Impaired endometrial receptivity and poor embryo quality were the two key causes of RIF [45]. The endometrium of the RIF patients showed decreased LIF expression and dysregulated LIF signaling [46, 47]. GnRHa therapy may boost the expression of implantation-related factors, such as HOXA10 and LIF [11, 12, 32, 33]. As mentioned above, culture medium with GnRHa can enhance embryo development and inhibit apoptosis [10, 13, 14]. Furthermore, immunological factor, such as altered Th1/Th2 ratio and imbalances of natural killer cells, might be another possible cause of RIF [45]. GnRHa was reported to play a direct role in immune modulation in patients with RIF and adenomyosis [48, 49]. Thus, we speculated that additional GnRHa administration during the luteal phase may have a beneficial effect on reproductive outcomes in women with RIF. The multivariate analysis of our study supported this speculation, showing a 4.55-fold increase in the possibility of ongoing pregnancy (95% CI 1.69–12.30, P = 0.003) and a 4.30-fold increase in the possibility of live birth (95% CI 1.59–11.65, P = 0.004) when luteal GnRHa was added to progesterone in RIF patients undergoing GnRHa-HRT cycles. However, we must interpret the data from the subgroup analysis discreetly because of the small population. More large-scale studies are required to prove our results.

One concern regarding GnRHa-HRT protocol is whether GnRH-R in the endometrium is also downregulated by long-acting GnRHa. Our data showed that luteal GnRHa administration still took effects in the GnRHa-HRT cycles. There might be four possibilities. First, GnRH-R in the endometrium was not downregulated by long-acting GnRHa. Second, long-acting GnRHa downregulated GnRH-R in the endometrium, but its effects faded out at the time of luteal GnRHa administration. Third, GnRH-R in the endometrium was downregulated by long-acting GnRHa. However, newly GnRH-R in the endometrium expressed during the luteal phase and was not downregulated by the long-acting GnRHa. Fourth, long-acting GnRHa downregulated GnRH-R in the endometrium and its effects continued during the luteal phase. The beneficial effects of luteal GnRHa administration came from acting on embryos. Further studies are required to investigate the issue. However, studies revealed that luteal GnRHa administration could improve fresh IVF outcomes under GnRHa long protocol [42]. Moreover, Xu et al. demonstrated that higher mRNA and protein expression of HOXA10, MEIS1 and LIF in endometrium were observed in the depot GnRHa protocol compared to the long GnRHa and GnRH antagonist protocols [12]. These studies seemed to support that GnRH-R in the endometrium was not downregulated by GnRHa. Nevertheless, more studies are needed to confirm the assumption.

This study has several limitations. First, the main limitation of this study was its retrospective design and limited sample size. Large-scale RCTs are needed to verify our results. Next, whether to administer luteal GnRHa was determined on the basis of patients’ consideration and preference after physician consultation, which may introduce bias. Patients may refuse to use it because of financial pressure. Moreover, embryo selection was based on morphological grading, not euploidy, because PGT-A has not been widely used in our center. Therefore, the confounding effects from embryo aneuploidy could not be excluded. Fourth, the data from the subgroup analysis should be interpreted cautiously on account of the potential bias from the small population.

In conclusion, our data suggest that single-dose administration of GnRHa during the luteal phase may improve the live birth rate in patients undergoing the GnRHa-HRT protocol.

Availability of data and materials

The datasets used and/or analyzed during the current study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Abbreviations

AMH:

Anti-Müllerian hormone

ART:

Assisted reproductive technology

CI:

Confidence interval

ET:

Embryo transfer

fET:

Fresh embryo transfer

FET:

Frozen–thawed embryo transfer

FSH:

Follicle-stimulating hormone

GnRH:

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone

GnRHa:

GnRH agonist

GnRH-R:

GnRH receptor

HRT:

Hormone replacement therapy

hCG:

Human chorionic gonadotropin

ICSI:

Intracytoplasmic sperm injection

IVF:

in vitro fertilization

MMPs:

Modulate matrix metalloproteinases

OR:

Odds ratio

PAI-1:

Plasminogen activator inhibitor

PGT-A:

Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy

RCTs:

Randomized controlled trials

RIF:

Recurrent implantation failure

TESE:

Testicular sperm extraction

TIMPs:

Tissue-specific inhibitor of matrix metalloproteinases

uPA:

urokinase-type plasminogen activator

References

  1. Kushnir VA, Barad DH, Albertini DF, Darmon SK, Gleicher N. Systematic review of worldwide trends in assisted reproductive technology 2004-2013. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2017;15(1):6.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Zaat T, Zagers M, Mol F, Goddijn M, van Wely M, Mastenbroek S. Fresh versus frozen embryo transfers in assisted reproduction. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021;2(2):Cd011184.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Sha T, Yin X, Cheng W, Massey IY. Pregnancy-related complications and perinatal outcomes resulting from transfer of cryopreserved versus fresh embryos in vitro fertilization: a meta-analysis. Fertil Steril. 2018;109(2):330–42.e9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Wu H, Zhou P, Lin X, Wang S, Zhang S. Endometrial preparation for frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2021;38(8):1913–26.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Wu HM, Wang HS, Huang HY, Soong YK, MacCalman CD, Leung PC. GnRH signaling in intrauterine tissues. Reproduction. 2009;137(5):769–77.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Cheng CK, Leung PC. Molecular biology of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH)-I, GnRH-II, and their receptors in humans. Endocr Rev. 2005;26(2):283–306.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Raga F, Casañ EM, Kruessel JS, Wen Y, Huang HY, Nezhat C, et al. Quantitative gonadotropin-releasing hormone gene expression and immunohistochemical localization in human endometrium throughout the menstrual cycle. Biol Reprod. 1998;59(3):661–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Casañ EM, Raga F, Kruessel JS, Wen Y, Nezhat C, Polan ML. Immunoreactive gonadotropin-releasing hormone expression in cycling human endometrium of fertile patients. Fertil Steril. 1998;70(1):102–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Casañ EM, Raga F, Polan ML. GnRH mRNA and protein expression in human preimplantation embryos. Mol Hum Reprod. 1999;5(3):234–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Raga F, Casañ EM, Kruessel J, Wen Y, Bonilla-Musoles F, Polan ML. The role of gonadotropin-releasing hormone in murine preimplantation embryonic development. Endocrinology. 1999;140(8):3705–12.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Li L, Liu L, Kou Z, Huo M, An J, Zhang X. GnRH agonist treatment regulates IL-6 and IL-11 expression in endometrial stromal cells for patients with HRT regiment in frozen embryo transfer cycles. Reprod Biol. 2022;22(2):100608.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Xu B, Geerts D, Hu S, Yue J, Li Z, Zhu G, et al. The depot GnRH agonist protocol improves the live birth rate per fresh embryo transfer cycle, but not the cumulative live birth rate in normal responders: a randomized controlled trial and molecular mechanism study. Hum Reprod. 2020;35(6):1306–18.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Nam DH, Lee SH, Kim HS, Lee GS, Jeong YW, Kim S, et al. The role of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) and its receptor in development of porcine preimplantation embryos derived from in vitro fertilization. Theriogenology. 2005;63(1):190–201.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Kawamura K, Fukuda J, Kumagai J, Shimizu Y, Kodama H, Nakamura A, et al. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone I analog acts as an antiapoptotic factor in mouse blastocysts. Endocrinology. 2005;146(9):4105–16.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. van der Linden M, Buckingham K, Farquhar C, Kremer JA, Metwally M. Luteal phase support for assisted reproduction cycles. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015;(7):CD009154.

  16. Oliveira JB, Baruffi R, Petersen CG, Mauri AL, Cavagna M, Franco JG Jr. Administration of single-dose GnRH agonist in the luteal phase in ICSI cycles: a meta-analysis. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2010;8:107.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  17. Kyrou D, Kolibianakis EM, Fatemi HM, Tarlatzi TB, Devroey P, Tarlatzis BC. Increased live birth rates with GnRH agonist addition for luteal support in ICSI/IVF cycles: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2011;17(6):734–40.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Ma X, Du W, Hu J, Yang Y, Zhang X. Effect of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist addition for luteal support on pregnancy outcome in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles: a Meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials. Gynecol Obstet Investig. 2020;85(1):13–25.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Chau LTM, Tu DK, Lehert P, Dung DV, Thanh LQ, Tuan VM. Clinical pregnancy following GnRH agonist administration in the luteal phase of fresh or frozen assisted reproductive technology (ART) cycles: systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol X. 2019;3:100046.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  20. Xu J, Li SZ, Yin MN, Liang PL, Li P, Sun L. Endometrial preparation for frozen-thawed embryo transfer with or without pretreatment with GnRH agonist: a randomized controlled trial at two centers. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2021;12:722253.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Samsami A, Chitsazi Z, Namazi G. Frozen thawed embryo transfer cycles; a comparison of pregnancy outcomes with and without prior pituitary suppression by GnRH agonists: An RCT. Int J Reprod Biomed. 2018;16(9):587–94.

    CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Li X, Lin J, Zhang L, Liu Y. Effects of gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist pretreatment on frozen embryo transfer outcomes in artificial cycles: a meta-analysis. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2022. Online ahead of print.

  23. Wu Y, Huang J, Zhong G, Lan J, Lin H, Zhang Q. Long-term GnRH agonist pretreatment before frozen embryo transfer improves pregnancy outcomes in women with adenomyosis. Reprod BioMed Online. 2022;44(2):380–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Niu Z, Chen Q, Sun Y, Feng Y. Long-term pituitary downregulation before frozen embryo transfer could improve pregnancy outcomes in women with adenomyosis. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2013;29(12):1026–30.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Xia L, Tian L, Zhang S, Huang J, Wu Q. Hormonal replacement treatment for frozen-thawed embryo transfer with or without GnRH agonist pretreatment: a retrospective cohort study stratified by times of embryo implantation failures. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2022;13:803471.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Pan D, Yang J, Zhang N, Wang L, Li N, Shi J, et al. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist downregulation combined with hormone replacement therapy improves the reproductive outcome in frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles for patients of advanced reproductive age with idiopathic recurrent implantation failure. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2022;20(1):26.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Liu Y, Ma L, Zhu M, Yin H, Yan H, Shi M. STROBE-GnRHa pretreatment in frozen-embryo transfer cycles improves clinical outcomes for patients with persistent thin endometrium: a case-control study. Medicine (Baltimore). 2022;101(31):e29928.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Scientists A, in Reproductive M, Embryology ESIGo. The Istanbul consensus workshop on embryo assessment: proceedings of an expert meeting. Hum Reprod. 2011;26(6):1270–83.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Koot YEM, Hviid Saxtorph M, Goddijn M, de Bever S, Eijkemans MJC, Wely MV, et al. What is the prognosis for a live birth after unexplained recurrent implantation failure following IVF/ICSI? Hum Reprod. 2019;34(10):2044–52.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Shemesh M. Actions of gonadotrophins on the uterus. Reproduction. 2001;121(6):835–42.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Maggi R, Cariboni AM, Marelli MM, Moretti RM, Andrè V, Marzagalli M, et al. GnRH and GnRH receptors in the pathophysiology of the human female reproductive system. Hum Reprod Update. 2016;22(3):358–81.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Guo S, Li Z, Yan L, Sun Y, Feng Y. GnRH agonist improves pregnancy outcome in mice with induced adenomyosis by restoring endometrial receptivity. Drug Des Devel Ther. 2018;12:1621–31.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  33. Ruan HC, Zhu XM, Luo Q, Liu AX, Qian YL, Zhou CY, et al. Ovarian stimulation with GnRH agonist, but not GnRH antagonist, partially restores the expression of endometrial integrin beta3 and leukaemia-inhibitory factor and improves uterine receptivity in mice. Hum Reprod. 2006;21(10):2521–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Chou CS, Tai CJ, MacCalman CD, Leung PC. Dose-dependent effects of gonadotropin releasing hormone on matrix metalloproteinase (MMP)-2, and MMP-9 and tissue specific inhibitor of metalloproteinases-1 messenger ribonucleic acid levels in human decidual stromal cells in vitro. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2003;88(2):680–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Vu TH, Werb Z. Matrix metalloproteinases: effectors of development and normal physiology. Genes Dev. 2000;14(17):2123–33.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Wu HM, Huang HY, Lee CL, Soong YK, Leung PC, Wang HS. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone type II (GnRH-II) agonist regulates the motility of human decidual endometrial stromal cells: possible effect on embryo implantation and pregnancy. Biol Reprod. 2015;92(4):98.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  37. Hardy K, Spanos S. Growth factor expression and function in the human and mouse preimplantation embryo. J Endocrinol. 2002;172(2):221–36.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  38. Kane MT, Morgan PM, Coonan C. Peptide growth factors and preimplantation development. Hum Reprod Update. 1997;3(2):137–57.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  39. Chou CS, Zhu H, Shalev E, MacCalman CD, Leung PC. The effects of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) I and GnRH II on the urokinase-type plasminogen activator/plasminogen activator inhibitor system in human extravillous cytotrophoblasts in vitro. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2002;87(12):5594–603.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  40. Lin LS, Roberts VJ, Yen SS. Expression of human gonadotropin-releasing hormone receptor gene in the placenta and its functional relationship to human chorionic gonadotropin secretion. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1995;80(2):580–5.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Iwashita M, Kudo Y, Shinozaki Y, Takeda Y. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone increases serum human chorionic gonadotropin in pregnant women. Endocr J. 1993;40(5):539–44.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  42. Wu H, Zhang S, Lin X, Wang S, Zhou P. Luteal phase support for in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection fresh cycles: a systematic review and network meta-analysis. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2021;19(1):103.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  43. Liu Y, Wu Y, Pan Z, Jiang F, Lu Y, Meng Y. Single-dose versus multiple-dose GnRH agonist for luteal-phase support in women undergoing IVF/ICSI cycles: a network Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Front Endocrinol (Lausanne). 2022;13:802688.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  44. Alsbjerg B, Kesmodel US, Elbaek HO, Laursen R, Laursen SB, Andreasen D, et al. GnRH agonist supplementation in hormone replacement therapy-frozen embryo transfer cycles: a randomized controlled trial. Reprod BioMed Online. 2022;44(2):261–70.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  45. Mukherjee N, Sharma R, Modi D. Immune alterations in recurrent implantation failure. Am J Reprod Immunol. 2023;89(2):e13563.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  46. Huang C, Sun H, Wang Z, Liu Y, Cheng X, Liu J, et al. Increased Krüppel-like factor 12 impairs embryo attachment via downregulation of leukemia inhibitory factor in women with recurrent implantation failure. Cell Death Dis. 2018;4:23.

    Google Scholar 

  47. Choi Y, Kim HR, Lim EJ, Park M, Yoon JA, Kim YS, et al. Integrative analyses of uterine transcriptome and MicroRNAome reveal compromised LIF-STAT3 signaling and progesterone response in the endometrium of patients with recurrent/repeated implantation failure (RIF). PLoS One. 2016;11(6):e0157696.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Guo Z, Shi P, Hao C. Effect of GnRHa on Th17/Treg cells in peripheral blood of patients with unexplained repeated implantation failure. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2018;298(6):1211–8.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Tian J, Kang N, Wang J, Sun H, Yan G, Huang C, et al. Transcriptome analysis of eutopic endometrium in adenomyosis after GnRH agonist treatment. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2022;20(1):13.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Not applicable.

Funding

Not applicable.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Li-Te Lin and Kuan-Hao Tsui contributed equally to this work.

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital, No.386, Dazhong 1st Rd., Zuoying Dist, Kaohsiung City, 81362, Taiwan

    Wei-Shan Chang, Pei-Hsuan Lin, Chia-Jung Li, Chyi-Uei Chern, Yu-Chen Chen, Li-Te Lin & Kuan-Hao Tsui

  2. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Kaohsiung Armed Forces General Hospital, Kaohsiung City, Taiwan

    Wei-Shan Chang

  3. Institute of Biopharmaceutical Sciences, National Sun Yat-sen University, Kaohsiung City, Taiwan

    Chia-Jung Li, Li-Te Lin & Kuan-Hao Tsui

  4. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine, National Yang-Ming University, Taipei City, Taiwan

    Li-Te Lin & Kuan-Hao Tsui

  5. Department of Biological Science, National Sun Yat-sen University, Kaohsiung City, Taiwan

    Li-Te Lin & Kuan-Hao Tsui

Authors
  1. Wei-Shan Chang
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Pei-Hsuan Lin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Chia-Jung Li
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Chyi-Uei Chern
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Yu-Chen Chen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Li-Te Lin
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Kuan-Hao Tsui
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

Li-Te Lin, Kuan-Hao Tsui and Pei-Hsuan Lin contributed to the conception and design of the study; Yu-Chen Chen and Chyi-Uei Chern organized the database and prepared Fig. 1; Li-Te Lin and Chia-Jung Li performed the statistical analysis and prepared tables; Wei-Shan Chang wrote the first draft of the manuscript; Li-Te Lin and Kuan-Hao Tsui wrote sections of the manuscript. All authors reviewed and approved the manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to Li-Te Lin or Kuan-Hao Tsui.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

The study conformed to the Declaration of Helsinki for Medical Research about human subjects. In addition, approval was obtained from the Institutional Review Board of Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital Hospital, with the identifier KSVGH22-CT12-14. The study was performed in accordance with approved guidelines. The need for informed consent was waived by the Institutional Review Board of Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital because of its retrospective design.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Additional file 1: Supplementary Table 1.

Subgroup analysis (Day 3 or Day 5 embryo transfer) of patients undergoing the GnRHa-HRT protocol with or without luteal GnRHa administration.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chang, WS., Lin, PH., Li, CJ. et al. Additional single dose GnRH agonist during luteal phase support may improve live birth rate in GnRHa-HRT frozen–thawed embryo transfer cycle: a retrospective cohort study. BMC Pregnancy Childbirth 23, 174 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-023-05491-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-023-05491-y

Keywords

BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth

ISSN: 1471-2393

Contact us