TabMenu

Poverty and InequalitySexual and Reproductive HealthFamily, Maternal & Child HealthMethodology

Is the type of gonadotropin-releasing hormone suppression protocol for ovarian hyperstimulation associated with ectopic pregnancy in fresh autologous cycles for in vitro fertilization?

TitleIs the type of gonadotropin-releasing hormone suppression protocol for ovarian hyperstimulation associated with ectopic pregnancy in fresh autologous cycles for in vitro fertilization?
Publication TypeJournal Article
Year of Publication2016
AuthorsLondra, L, Moreau, C, Strobino, D, Bhasin, A, Zhao, Y
JournalFertil Steril
Volume106
Pagination666-72
Date PublishedSep 01
ISBN Number0015-0282
Accession Number27320035
KeywordsEctopic pregnancy, embryo transfer, fresh cycles, Ivf, ovarian hyperstimulation protocol
Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the association between different ovarian hyperstimulation protocols and ectopic pregnancy (EP) in in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles in fresh autologous embryo transfer cycles in the United States between 2008 and 2011 as reported to the Society of Assisted Reproductive Technology (SART). DESIGN: Historical cohort study. SETTING: Not applicable. PATIENT(S): None. INTERVENTION(S): None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): All autologous cycles that resulted in a clinical pregnancy after a fresh, intrauterine embryo transfer and described characteristics of cycles according to protocol were included: luteal GnRH agonist, GnRH agonist flare, or GnRH antagonist. Multivariate logistic regression was conducted to investigate the association between type of protocol and EP. RESULT(S): Among 136,605 clinical pregnancies, 2,645 (1.94%) were EP. Ectopic pregnancy was more frequent with GnRH antagonist (2.4%) cycles than with GnRH agonist flare (2.1%) or luteal GnRH agonist (1.6%) cycles. After adjusting for maternal and treatment characteristics, the GnRH antagonist and the GnRH agonist flare protocols were associated with increased odds of EP (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] 1.52; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.39-1.65; and aOR 1.25; 95% CI, 1.09-1.44, respectively) compared with luteal GnRH agonist. Analysis of differences in the factors related to EP in luteal GnRH agonist versus GnRH antagonist protocols indicated that diminished ovarian reserve was associated with an increased risk of EP in luteal GnRH agonist but not in GnRH antagonist cycles. CONCLUSION(S): The type of protocol used during ovarian hyperstimulation in fresh autologous cycles was associated with EP. This finding suggests a role for extrapituitary GnRH on the tubal and uterine environment during ovarian hyperstimulation treatment for IVF.