Endocrine responses to gonadotrophins after LHRH agonist administration on cycle days 1-4: prevention of premature luteinization

A treatment regime comprising an intranasally administered luteinizinghormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) agonist analogue (buserelin)on cycle days 1–4, followed by gonadotrophin administration[follicle stimulating hormone (FSH)/human menopausal gonadotrophin(HMG)] resulted in identical oestradiol (E₂) responses comparedwith the reference method using clomiphene citrate (CC) andgonadotrophins. Immediately after analogue administration (day4), buserelin-treated women showed short-lived elevations inserum LH and progesterone concentrations, but in the later follicularphase, the serum LH concentration was lowered compared withthe controls. None of the women treated with analogue displayedelevated serum LH or progesterone concentrations at the timeof injection of human chorionic gonadotrophin. In the earlyluteal phase, these women had higher serum levels of progesteroneand higher progesterone to E2 ratios than the controls, butthe length of the luteal phase was slightly shortened. Hence,in hyperstimulated cycles, 4-day treatment with buserelin causedprofound endocrinological changes: namely, short-term rescueof the corpus luteum, prevention of an endogenous LH rise andpremature luteinization and increased progesterone productionin the early luteal phase     

Serum inhibin levels in gonadotrophin stimulated in-vitro fertilization/gamete intra-fallopian transfer cycles.

Serum inhibin concentrations of 64 cycles of in-vitro fertilization--embryo transfer (IVF-ET) or gamete intra-Fallopian transfer (GIFT) have been analysed retrospectively. No significant difference was observed in serum inhibin levels of cycles stimulated with buserelin and human menopausal gonadotrophin (HMG) or HMG alone. During the late follicular phase, serum inhibin was higher in cycles resulting in pregnancy than in cycles without a pregnancy (peak values on day +1: 8.3 versus 6.4 IU/ml, respectively). The same difference was found between stimulation cycles resulting in a viable or a non-viable pregnancy (peak values on day +1: 8.3 versus 7.5 IU/ml). However, these differences were not significant. During the early luteal phase, serum inhibin values were similar in these groups of patients. Our results indicate that the use of the gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogue buserelin, in combination with HMG, for ovarian stimulation does not affect inhibin production by granulosa cells in vivo. The late follicular and early luteal concentrations of serum inhibin have to be considered unsuitable as predictors in IVF/GIFT cycles with respect to pregnancy and pregnancy outcome.     

Is there a difference in the function of granulosa-luteal cells in patients undergoing in-vitro fertilization either with gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist or gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonist?

Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) regulates gonadotrophin release. It has been shown that GnRH may have a direct effect on the ovary, as the addition of GnRH to granulosa cell cultures inhibits the production of progesterone and oestradiol. Specific GnRH receptors have been found to be present in rat and human granulosa cells. Desensitization of the pituitary by GnRH agonist has become common in in-vitro fertilization (IVF) treatment, usually by a long protocol of 2-3 weeks. With the introduction of GnRH antagonists, which produce an immediate blockage of the GnRH receptors, a much shorter exposure is needed of 3-6 days. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of a GnRH agonist (buserelin) and a GnRH antagonist (cetrorelix) on the function of granulosa cells cultured in vitro from IVF patients. Women were treated by IVF randomized either to have buserelin nasal spray from the luteal phase in the previous cycle or cetrorelix from day 6 of the cycle. Both groups had ovarian stimulation with human menopausal gonadotrophin (HMG) 150 IU daily, i.e. HCG was administered when the follicles were larger than 17 mm, and aspirated 36 h later. Granulosa cells, separated and washed from large follicles containing ova, were pooled. After 48 h of pre-incubation, the granulosa cells were cultured for 4 days in medium with either added testosterone or cAMP with or without HCG, with change of medium after 2 days. The progesterone and oestradiol concentrations in the culture medium were measured by immunological assay, and cellular protein was measured by microprotein assay. The results showed that granulosa cells from women treated with GnRH antagonist (cetrorelix) responded earlier to the in-vitro hormone stimulation in terms of progesterone accumulation than women treated with the GnRH agonist (buserelin). This may have been due to difference in time of exposure to the analogue. The results may indicate that the luteal function is less impaired in GnRH antagonist treatment than in GnRH agonist treatment.     

Triggering ovulation with endogenous luteinizing hormone may prevent the ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome

In a series of 126 therapeutic cycles in 48 patients with primary infertility and treated with HMG for anovulation or preparation to insemination, ovulation was triggered by endogenous LH instead of HCG when the patient was considered to be at high risk for ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHS), (plasma oestradiol greater than 1200 pg/ml) and/or multiple pregnancy (greater than 3 follicles greater than 17 mm in diameter). The endogenous LH surge was provoked and maintained by intranasal buserelin 200 micrograms three times at 8-hourly intervals. In the 37 cycles with buserelin, no OHS occurred despite high preovulatory levels of oestradiol; a single twin pregnancy was recorded despite the presence of numerous mature preovulatory follicles. Conception results (21.6% pregnancy per therapeutic cycle) compared favourably with HCG administration (16.8%). It is concluded that, when ovulation must be triggered in a hazardous situation, the use of endogenous LH through the administration of a short-acting GnRH analogue prevents the complications of exaggerated follicular stimulation.     

Human endometrial maturation is markedly improved after luteal supplementation of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogue/human menopausal gonadotrophin stimulated cycles

In human cycles stimulated for ovulation with gonadotrophin–releasinghormone (GnRH) agonists and human menopausal gonadotrophin (HMG),a luteal phase defect has been described. To evaluate the influenceon the endometrium, endometrial development in GnRH agonist/HMGstimulated cycles was assessed in cycles with and without lutealphase supplementation. Endometrial histological maturation,ultrastructure and oestrogen receptor (ER) and progesteronereceptor (PR) status were analysed in the mid-luteal phase.Serum concentrations of oestradiol and progesterone were measureddaily from days 1–5 of the luteal phase. Supplementationof the luteal phase was achieved with either human chorionicgonadotrophin or natural progesterone, administered intramuscularlyor intravaginally. In non-supplemented cycles all endometrialfeatures were consistent with an impaired progesterone bioavailability.After supplementation of the luteal phase, fewer signs of lutealphase deficiency were visible, especially with the intravaginalroute of progesterone administration. We concluded that theendometrial parameters confirm the need for luteal support inGnRH agonist/HMG stimulated cycles.     

Pituitary gonadotrophin secretory capacity during the luteal phase in superovulation using GnRH-agonists and HMG in a desensitization or flare-up protocol.

Pituitary gonadotrophin reserve and basal gonadotrophin secretion were tested during the luteal phase in women superovulated with buserelin/human menopausal gonadotrophin (HMG) in a desensitization (n = 17) or flare-up protocol (n = 7). In the desensitization protocol the luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) stimulated serum LH and follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) concentrations remained impaired at least until day 14 after arrest of the agonist. In the flare-up protocol basal and stimulated LH secretion was still abnormal on days 14 and 15 after human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG) injection. Normal basal serum FSH concentrations were measured at the end of the luteal phase in the flare-up protocol, but the response of FSH to LHRH injection was still subnormal. We conclude that gonadotrophin function remained impaired until the end of the luteal phase after desensitization and flare-up GnRH-agonist and HMG stimulation protocols. Corpus luteum stimulation with exogenous HCG or substitution therapy using natural progesterone are required to prevent the possible negative effects resulting from pituitary dysfunction after GnRH-agonist treatment.     

Outcome of treatment subsequent to the elective cryopreservation of all embryos from women at risk of the ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome.

From 1st June 1989 to 31st May 1991, 78 women with a serum oestradiol level greater than 3500 pg/ml on the day of the ovulatory trigger, following pituitary suppression with buserelin and ovarian stimulation with human menopausal gonadotrophins (HMG), had all their embryos electively cryopreserved at the pronucleate stage to minimize the risk of developing ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHS). Treatment with buserelin was continued in the luteal phase. A median of 19 oocytes (range 7-43) was obtained and 12 embryos (range 1-37) frozen per cycle. Twenty-one (27%) women developed OHS (six severe). Women developing OHS had higher (P less than 0.05) serum oestradiol concentrations on the 7th day after oocyte retrieval, compared to those who did not. No differences were found for any of the following criteria: aetiology of infertility, age, total dose of HMG, number of oocytes, fertilization rate or freeze-thaw survival of embryos. Subsequently, 125 frozen-thawed embryo replacements have been undertaken, using buserelin and hormone replacement therapy (HRT) (n = 93) or natural cycles (n = 32). The overall freeze-thaw survival and implantation rates per embryo were 71.8 and 11.7%, respectively. The pregnancy rates in natural cycles (19%) and buserelin/HRT cycles (29%) were not significantly different.     

Differential effects of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonists administered as desensitizing or flare protocols on hormonal function in the luteal phase of hyperstimulated cycles

The incorporation of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) in in-vitro fertilization (IVF) stimulation protocols has led to doubt about the quality of the subsequent luteal phase. The effects of two GnRHa stimulation protocols on luteal phase concentrations of oestradiol (E2), progesterone (P), luteinizing hormone (LH) and follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) were compared with the standard clomiphene stimulation regimen. Subjects receiving clomiphene with human menopausal gonadotrophin (HMG, n = 377) showed essentially similar luteal phase P concentrations to those receiving leuprolide acetate/HMG as a desensitization protocol. Subjects receiving concomitant leuprolide and HMG from day 2 to utilize the flare effect of the GnRHa exhibited significantly lower P levels in the luteal phase compared to clomiphene/HMG and leuprolide desensitization protocols despite the addition of HCG support. This occurred despite equivalent E2 concentrations at the time of ovulation and identical numbers of oocytes recovered. LH concentrations in non-conception cycles were suppressed for at least 14 days in the luteal phase in both GnRHa protocols compared to clomiphene stimulation. Differences were less obvious in cycles where conception occurred suggesting that implantation may proceed more favourably when the luteal endocrinology was optimal. It is concluded that flare methods of GnRHa hyperstimulation are associated with significantly different luteal phases compared with clomiphene or desensitization protocols. It is proposed that the use of the flare type of stimulation may significantly influence the response of the granulosa cells to LH or HCG via gonadotrophin receptors or through altered post-receptor function.     

Is continuation of a gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) necessary for women at risk of developing the ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome?

A total of 28 women scheduled for in-vitro fertilization used buserelin and human menopausal gonadotrophin (HMG) for ovarian stimulation. One group (I) of 17 women was given human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG 10,000 IU) to trigger ovulation, but the resulting embryos were electively cryopreserved because of the risk (serum oestradiol greater than or equal to 3500 pg/ml) of developing the ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). Six women continued the buserelin therapy in the luteal phase and eleven did not. In group II (n = 11), the HMG injections were discontinued because of an exaggerated ovarian response and the HCG was omitted. Six of these women continued the buserelin injections until the onset of menses and five did not. In both groups, the ovarian response to induction of ovulation (serum oestradiol concentrations and number of follicles) was similar for those who did or did not continue buserelin therapy. There was no difference in the rate of ovarian quiescence (weekly fall in serum oestradiol concentration following the stimulation) between those women who did or did not continue the buserelin therapy in either group. The serum luteinizing hormone concentrations remained low in all women in both groups. We conclude that the omission of buserelin therapy after discontinuing the HMG in women at risk of developing OHSS does not affect subsequent ovarian quiescence.     

Luteal phase support and severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome.

The incidence and statistical associations of the ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) were studied in 304 egg retrievals with gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist suppression, gonadotrophin administration and follicular aspiration. In addition to preserving corpus luteum function, the luteal phase administration of human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG) was associated with a higher incidence of severe OHSS than was supplementation with progesterone alone (12 versus 0%, P less than 0.001). Severe OHSS occurred in 3.7% and 12% of retrievals without and with pregnancy respectively (P less than 0.01). Stepwise logistic regression showed that the occurrence of moderate or severe OHSS was statistically predicted by the log of the serum oestradiol on the day the initial HCG was given (P less than 0.0001), treatment with luteal phase HCG (P less than 0.0003), and fetal number (P less than 0.0079). In the late luteal phase of cycles without luteal HCG, the serum oestradiol concentration was one-tenth and the serum progesterone concentration was one-fifth of the luteal phase value with HCG support (P less than 0.001). Without luteal phase HCG, oestradiol was two-fold higher (P less than 0.001) and progesterone was 1.4-fold higher (P less than 0.005) in pregnant than in non-pregnant women. With luteal phase HCG, oestradiol was 1.4-fold higher in pregnant than in non-pregnant women (P less than 0.05), and progesterone was 1.7-fold higher (P less than 0.001). Oestradiol upper limits of 4400 and 14,700 pmol/l (1200 and 4000 pg/ml) for cycles with and without luteal phase HCG respectively correspond to approximately 5% risk of moderate or severe OHSS with a singleton pregnancy under these conditions.     

Endocrinology: Progesterone alone versus progesterone combined with HCG as luteal support in GnRHa/HMG induced IVF cycles: a randomized clinical trial

Two different regimens of luteal support in gonadotrophin hormone-releasinghormone (GnRH) analoguefhuman menopausal gonadotrophin (GnRHa/HMG)-inducedin-vitro fertilization cycles (IVF) were compared in a randomizedclinical trial. After embryo transfer, either vaginal progesteronealone was administered (n=89, P group), or a combination ofvaginal progesterone and human chorionic gonadotrophin (n=87,P/HCG group). The primary aim of this study was to assess theeffect of the different regimens of luteal support on the pregnancyrate. The secondary aim was to compare oestradiol and progesteroneconcentrations in the luteal phase between the two groups, andassess their effect on the pregnancy rate. A clinical pregnancyrate of 15% was found in the P/HCG group in comparison with26% in the P group (odds ratio 0.49; 99% confidence interval:0.18–1.3). The luteal serum oestradiol and progesteronevalues in the P/HCG group were significantly higher when comparedwith the P group on the 6th, 9th and 12th day after oocyte retrieval(Wilcoxon P<0.001). In accordance with the high oestradiolconcentrations, more cases of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome(OHSS) were found in the P/HCG group. Oestradiol values on the9th day after oocyte retrieval, presumably the day of implantation,appeared to be higher in women who did not become clinicallypregnant. We conclude that vaginal progesterone alone providessufficient luteal support in GnRHa/HMG induced IVF cycles. Thecombination of vaginal progesterone and HCG as luteal supportleads to significant high luteal oestradiol and progesteroneconcentrations. But a high concentration of oestradiol seemsto have a deleterious effect on the implantation process, resultingin a low pregnancy rate.     

GnRH agonist (buserelin) or hCG for ovulation induction in GnRH antagonist IVF/ICSI cycles: a prospective randomized study

BACKGROUND: We aimed to determine the efficacy of ovarian hyperstimulation protocols employing a GnRH antagonist to prevent a premature LH rise allowing final oocyte maturation and ovulation to be induced by a single bolus of either a GnRH agonist or hCG. METHODS: A total of 122 normogonadotrophic patients following a flexible antagonist protocol was stimulated with recombinant human FSH and prospectively randomized (sealed envelopes) to ovulation induction with a single bolus of either 0.5 mg buserelin s.c. (n = 55) or 10,000 IU of hCG (n = 67). A maximum of two embryos was transferred. Luteal support consisted of micronized progesterone vaginally, 90 mg a day, and estradiol, 4 mg a day per os. RESULTS: Ovulation was induced with GnRH agonist in 55 patients and hCG in 67 patients. Significantly more metaphase II (MII) oocytes were retrieved in the GnRH agonist group (P < 0.02). Significantly higher levels of LH and FSH (P < 0.001) and significantly lower levels of progesterone and estradiol (P < 0.001) were seen in the GnRH agonist group during the luteal phase. The implantation rate, 33/97 versus 3/89 (P < 0.001), clinical pregnancy rate, 36 versus 6% (P = 0.002), and rate of early pregnancy loss, 4% versus 79% (P = 0.005), were significantly in favour of hCG. CONCLUSIONS: Ovulation induction with a GnRH agonist resulted in significantly more MII oocytes. However, a significantly lower implantation rate and clinical pregnancy rate in addition to a significantly higher rate of early pregnancy loss was seen in the GnRH agonist group, most probably due to a luteal phase deficiency.     

Luteal phase and clinical outcome after human menopausal gonadotrophin/gonadotrophin releasing hormone antagonist treatment for ovarian stimulation in in-vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles.

The luteal phase hormonal profile and the clinical outcome of 69 patients undergoing in-vitro fertilization (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) after ovarian stimulation with human menopausal gonadotrophin (HMG) and the gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist Cetrorelix were analysed. Twenty-four patients received Cetrorelix 0.5 mg (group I) while in 45 patients Cetrorelix 0.25 mg was administered (group II). Human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG) was used as luteal support. Nine clinical pregnancies were obtained in group I (37.5%) and 12 in group II (26. 6%). These results were not significantly different. Serum progesterone and oestradiol concentrations did not differ between the two groups either in pregnant or non-pregnant patients. An expected decrease of the same hormones was observed 8 days after the pre-ovulatory HCG injection in non-pregnant women. With regard to serum luteinizing hormone concentrations, a decrease was observed 2 days after the pre-ovulatory HCG injection and was maintained at almost undetectable levels throughout the entire luteal phase in both conception and non-conception cycles of group I and group II. This study demonstrates that different doses of GnRH antagonist do not have any impact on the luteal phase of IVF/ICSI cycles when hormonal support is given.     

Comparison of LH concentrations in the early and mid-luteal phase in IVF cycles after treatment with HMG alone or in association with the GnRH antagonist Cetrorelix

Luteinizing hormone (LH) is mandatory for the maintenance of the corpus luteum. Ovarian stimulation for IVF has been associated with a defective luteal phase. The luteal phases of two groups of patients with normal menstrual cycles and no endocrinological cause of infertility were retrospectively analysed in IVF cycles. Thirty-one infertile patients stimulated with human menopausal gonadotrophins (HMG) for IVF to whom the gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist Cetrorelix 0.25 mg was also administered to prevent the LH surge (group I) were compared with 31 infertile patients stimulated with HMG alone (group II). Despite differences in the stimulation outcome, luteal LH serum concentrations were similar in the two groups. LH values dropped from 2.3 +/- 1 IU/l on the day of human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG) administration to 1.1 +/- 0.7 IU/l on day HCG +2 in group I (P < 0.0001) and from 5.1 +/- 3 to 1.2 +/- 1.7 IU/l (P < 0.0001) in group II. In the mid-luteal phase, LH concentrations were low in both groups. Our results suggest that suppressed LH concentrations in the early and mid-luteal phase may not be attributed solely to the GnRH-antagonist administration. Pituitary LH secretion may be inhibited by supraphysiological steroid serum concentrations via long-loop feedback and/or by the central action of the exogenously administered HCG via a short-loop mechanism.     

Comparison of luteal phase profile in gonadotrophin stimulated cycles with or without a gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonist.

BACKGROUND: The aim of our study was to explore luteal phase hormone profiles in gonadotrophin-stimulated cycles with or without gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist therapy during intrauterine insemination (IUI). Forty-one infertile couples were recruited in this randomized clinical study. METHODS: The 19 patients included in group A were treated for 21 cycles with recombinant FSH 150 IU/day starting from day 3 of the cycle and with the GnRH antagonist cetrorelix at the dose of 0.25 mg/day starting from the day in which a follicle with a mean diameter of > or =14 mm was seen at ultrasound scan. Cetrorelix was administered until human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG) administration. The 22 patients included in group B were administered recombinant FSH alone at the same dosage for 27 cycles. RESULTS: The two treatment groups showed a similar increase in progesterone concentration during the luteal phase. In the mid-luteal phase (day 6 after HCG), oestradiol concentrations in group B were significantly higher compared with group A (P < 0.05) but the oestradiol:progesterone ratio was similar in the two groups. Serum LH was completely suppressed during the follicular phase only in group A, concomitantly with GnRH antagonist administration. A total of six pregnancies, all ongoing, were achieved (14.3% per patient and 12.2% per cycle), equally distributed in group A and in group B. CONCLUSION: GnRH antagonists can be safely administered in gonadotrophin-stimulated IUI cycles without luteal phase supplementation because no deleterious effects of GnRH antagonist administration were noted on luteal progesterone concentration or on the duration of the luteal phase.     

Ovarian stimulation with HMG: results of a prospective randomized phase III European study comparing the luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH)-antagonist cetrorelix and the LHRH-agonist buserelin. European Cetrorelix Study Group

In this prospective and randomized study, 188 patients received the luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LHRH) antagonist cetrorelix, and 85 patients the LHRH agonist buserelin to prevent endogenous luteinizing hormone (LH) surges during ovarian stimulation in in-vitro fertilization (IVF)/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles. Ultimately, 181 patients (96.3%) in the cetrorelix group, and 77 (90.6%) in the buserelin group, reached the day of the human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG) injection. The mean number of human menopausal gonadotrophin (HMG) ampoules administered and the mean number of stimulation days with HMG were significantly less in the cetrorelix group than in the buserelin group (P < 0.01). A rise in LH and progesterone concentrations was observed in three of the 188 patients (1.6%) who received cetrorelix. On the day of the HCG administration, more follicles of a small diameter (11-14 mm) were observed in the buserelin group than in the cetrorelix group (P = 0. 02) and the mean serum oestradiol concentration was significantly higher in patients who received buserelin than in those who received cetrorelix (P < 0.01). Similar results were observed in fertilization, cleavage and pregnancy rates in the two groups. In conclusion, the use of the LHRH antagonists might be considered more advantageous because of the short-term application needed to inhibit gonadotrophin secretion, so allowing a reduction in the treatment time in a clinically significant manner.     

Effects of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonists on human ovarian steroid secretion in vivo and in vitro-results of a prospective, randomized in-vitro fertilization study

The aim of this prospective randomized study was to compare the effects of two gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists, buserelin and triptorelin, on human ovarian follicular steroidogenesis, oocyte fertilization and IVF treatment outcome. Ovulatory, healthy women undergoing IVF were treated either with human menopausal gonadotrophin (HMG) alone or with HMG and one of the two GnRH agonists. Serum and follicular fluid hormonal concentrations and cultures of luteinizing granulosa cells obtained during follicular aspiration were analysed. GnRH agonist treatment significantly affected steroidogenesis both in serum and follicular fluid. In follicular fluid, progesterone and oestradiol concentrations were significantly elevated while testosterone concentrations were significantly lower in the triptorelin group. The ratios of testosterone/progesterone, oestradiol/progesterone but not oestradiol/testosterone concentrations were significantly affected by GnRH agonist administration. Similarly, the steroidogenic activity of luteinizing granulosa cells in vitro was significantly decreased in women treated with GnRH agonists. Women treated with GnRH agonists had significantly more fertilized oocytes and cleaving embryos. The results indicate a marked effect of GnRH agonists on the pattern of ovarian follicular steroidogenesis that cannot be explained solely by changes in gonadotrophin concentrations.     

LH serum levels during ovarian stimulation as predictors of ovarian response and assisted reproduction outcome in down-regulated women stimulated with recombinant FSH

BACKGROUND: There has been much debate about the effect of 'residual' LH levels in normogonadotrophic women undergoing assisted reproduction with GnRH agonist down-regulation and recombinant FSH ovarian stimulation. The aim of this prospective study, where receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) analysis was used, was to assess further the usefulness of serum LH levels as predictors of ovarian response, assisted reproduction treatment outcome, and the outcome of pregnancy when measured throughout the ovarian stimulation period in a large cohort of such assisted reproduction treatment women. METHODS: A total of 246 consecutive women undergoing their first cycle of IVF or ICSI treatment were included in this study. Blood samples for hormone analyses were obtained on day S0 (the day when pituitary suppression was evidenced) and every other day from stimulation day 5 (S5) until the day of hCG injection. RESULTS: LH serum levels throughout ovarian stimulation treatment were similar for cancelled (n =32) versus non-cancelled (n = 214) cycles, non-conception (n = 132) versus conception (n = 82) cycles, and ongoing pregnancy (n = 66) versus early pregnancy loss (n = 16) groups. There was no correlation between LH serum levels in non-cancelled cycles and parameters of ovarian response and assisted reproduction treatment outcome. ROC analysis showed that serum LH concentration during ovarian stimulation was unable to discriminate between cancelled and non-cancelled cycles, conception versus non-conception cycles, or early pregnancy loss versus ongoing pregnancy groups. CONCLUSIONS: Serum LH measurements during ovarian stimulation with recombinant FSH under pituitary suppression in normogonadotrophic women undergoing assisted reproduction treatment cannot predict ovarian response, IVF/ICSI outcome, implantation, and the outcome of pregnancy. Thus, there is little underlying physiological support for the addition of LH in stimulation protocols if daily doses of an appropriate GnRH agonist (leuprolide or triptorelin having lower potency than buserelin) and a step-down regimen of recombinant FSH administration are used.     

Triggering of ovulation in human menopausal gonadotrophin-stimulated cycles: comparison between intravenously administered gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (100 and 500 {micro}g), GnRH agonist (buserelin, 500 {micro}g) and human chorionic gonadotrophin (10 000 IU)

We studied the peri-ovulatory and luteal phases in 38 humanmenopausal gonadotrophin (HMG)-stimulated cycles, in which ovulationwas triggered with four different i.v. bolus ovulation triggers:100 µg gonadotrophin-releasing hormone (GnRH; group A,n = 9), 500 µg GnRH agonist (GnRHa; group B, n = 10),10 000IU human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG; group C, n = 10)and 500 µg GnRH (group D, n = 9). Endogenous luteinizinghormone (LH) surges occurred in all cycles of groups A, B andD. The rise was slowest but highest in group B (P < 0.0001)and lowest in group A. Although the t₀ serum oestradiol valueswere similar in all groups, day +8 oestradiol and day +4 and+8 progesterone concentrations were higher in group C (P <0.05). At day +4 and +8, serum LH concentrations were lowest(P < 0.01) but follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) concentrationswere higher. Clinically, day +8 luteal scores showed a moreconspicuous degree of ovarian hyperstimulation in the HCG group(P = 0.0292). Luteal insufficiency, defined as cycles with progesteroneconcentrations of <8 ng/ml, occurred much more frequentlyin groups A, B and D than in group C (day +4: P < 0.0003;day +8: P < 0.0001), despite progesterone supplementation.Three pregnancies (one in group C and two in group D) and onemoderate case of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) (ina non-conceptional group D cycle) occurred. These findings showthat (i) ovulation occurs and pregnancy can be achieved followingan endogenous LH surge induced by GnRH and its agonists, (ii)a high frequency of luteal insufficiency occurs in such cycleseven with luteal supplementation and (iii) OHSS cannot be totallyprevented by this approach, although cycles with an endogenousLH surge in general result in fewer subclinical signs of ovarianhyperstimulation.     

Clinical and endocrinological changes in women following ovulation induction using buserelin acetate/human menopausal gonadotrophin augmented with biosynthetic human growth hormone.

Biosynthetic human growth hormone added to an ovarian stimulation regime of human menopausal gonadotrophin (HMG) for IVF treatment improves the response of women who were previously resistant. This study investigated the efficacy of growth hormone (GH)/buserelin/HMG treatment in women with a previous normal response to buserelin/HMG stimulation. Ten patients (28-36 years, mean 32.5 years) were treated with GH (6 IU/day) plus buserelin/HMG. A control group of 10 women (28-37 years mean 31.0 years) received buserelin/HMG alone. All were given buserelin 500 micrograms and 2 ampoules (150 IU) HMG daily once pituitary suppression had been confirmed. There was no improvement in the GH group as assessed by follicular growth rate or number, oocyte number per woman and pregnancy rate. There was no effect of GH upon the serum oestradiol level and the follicular fluid levels of oestradiol, GH and inhibin. Serum IGF-1 increased significantly during GH administration, returning to pre-treatment levels 2 days after the last dose of GH. Follicular IGF-1 was much higher in the GH-treated group than the controls. Significant correlations were found in the GH-treated group between follicular fluid GH and follicular fluid oestradiol concentrations and between follicular GH and follicular size. Follicular IGF-1 was correlated with the serum IGF-1 concentration on day 8 of the GH/HMG treatment. In conclusion GH/buserelin/HMG treatment in women with a previous normal response to buserelin/HMG stimulation increased their serum and follicular IGF-1 concentrations. However, it does not improve the clinical ovarian response or the follicular secretion of oestradiol or inhibin.