GnRH agonist versus GnRH antagonist in assisted reproduction cycles: Oocyte morphology

Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology

Volumn 10, Issue , 2012, Pages

  Cota, Ana Marcia M ^a   Oliveira, Joao Batista A ^a,b,c   Petersen, Claudia G ^a,b,c   Mauri, Ana L ^b,c   Massaro, Fabiana C ^b,c   Silva, Liliane F I ^a,b,c   Nicoletti, Andreia ^b   Cavagna, Mario ^b,c,d   Baruffi, Ricardo L R ^b,c   Franco Jr, José G ^a,b,c  

^a SÃO PAULO STATE UNIVERSITY UNESP   (Brazil)

^b Center for Human Reproduction Prof Franco Junior   (Brazil)

^c Paulista Center for Diagnosis Research and Training   (Brazil)

^d Women s Health Reference Centre Perola Byington Hospital   (Brazil)

Author keywords

Assisted reproduction technique; Gonadotropin releasing hormone analogues; In vitro fertilization; Oocyte morphology

Indexed keywords

CETRORELIX; GONADORELIN AGONIST; GONADORELIN ANTAGONIST; LEUPRORELIN; RECOMBINANT CHORIONIC GONADOTROPIN; RECOMBINANT FOLLITROPIN; RECOMBINANT LUTEINIZING HORMONE;

ADULT; ARTICLE; CELL STRUCTURE; CONTROLLED STUDY; DRUG DOSE INCREASE; ESTRUS CYCLE; FEMALE; FERTILIZATION IN VITRO; HUMAN; HUMAN CELL; HYPOPHYSIS; INFERTILITY THERAPY; INTRACYTOPLASMIC SPERM INJECTION; METAPHASE; METHODOLOGY; MICROSCOPE; OOCYTE DYSMORPHISM; OVARY DISEASE; POLAR BODY; PREVALENCE; PROSPECTIVE STUDY; RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL; TERATOLOGY;

FEMALE; GONADOTROPIN-RELEASING HORMONE; HORMONE ANTAGONISTS; HUMANS; LEUPROLIDE; OOCYTES; OVULATION INDUCTION; RECEPTORS, GONADOTROPIN; SPERM INJECTIONS, INTRACYTOPLASMIC;

EID: 84862233051     PISSN: None     EISSN: 14777827     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1186/1477-7827-10-33     Document Type: Article

References (65)

1. Rienzi L, Ubaldi FM, Iacobelli M, Minasi MG, Romano S, Ferrero S, Sapienza F, Baroni E, Litwicka K, Greco E. Significance of metaphase II human oocyte morphology on ICSI outcome. Fertil Steril 2008, 90:1692-1700. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.09.024, 18249393.
2. de Bruin JP, Dorland M, Spek ER, Posthuma G, van Haaften M, Looman CW, te Velde ER. Age-related changes in the ultrastructure of the resting follicle pool in human ovaries. Biol Reprod 2004, 70:419-424. 10.1095/biolreprod.103.015784, 14561658.
3. Rashidi BH, Sarvi F, Tehrani ES, Zayeri F, Movahedin M, Khanafshar N. The effect of HMG and recombinant human FSH on oocyte quality: a randomized single-blind clinical trial. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2005, 120:190-194. 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2004.11.007, 15925050.
4. Murber A, Fancsovits P, Ledo N, Gilan ZT, Rigo J, Urbancsek J. Impact of GnRH analogues on oocyte/embryo quality and embryo development in in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection cycles: a case control study. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2009, 7:103. 10.1186/1477-7827-7-103, 2762973, 19781070.
5. Janssens RM, Lambalk CB, Vermeiden JP, Schats R, Bernards JM, Rekers-Mombarg LT, Schoemaker J. Dose-finding study of triptorelin acetate for prevention of a premature LH surge in IVF: a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Hum Reprod 2000, 15:2333-2340. 10.1093/humrep/15.11.2333, 11056128.
6. Sbracia M, Colabianchi J, Giallonardo A, Giannini P, Piscitelli C, Morgia F, Montigiani M, Schimberni M. Cetrorelix protocol versus gonadotropin-releasing hormone analog suppression long protocol for superovulation in intracytoplasmic sperm injection patients older than 40. Fertil Steril 2009, 91:1842-1847. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.02.165, 18501900.
7. Aboulghar M, Mansour R, Al-Inany H, Abou-Setta AM, Mourad L, Serour G. Paternal age and outcome of intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Reprod Biomed Online 2007, 14:588-592. 10.1016/S1472-6483(10)61050-4, 17509198.
8. Cheung LP, Lam PM, Lok IH, Chiu TT, Yeung SY, Tjer CC, Haines CJ. GnRH antagonist versus long GnRH agonist protocol in poor responders undergoing IVF: a randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod 2005, 20:616-621. 10.1093/humrep/deh668, 15608037.
9. The European Middle East Orgalutran® Study Group Comparable clinical outcome using the GnRH antagonist ganirelix or a long protocol of the GnRH agonist triptorelin for the prevention of premature LH surges in women undergoing ovarian stimulation. Hum Reprod 2001, 16:644-651. 10.1093/humrep/16.4.644, 11278211, The European Middle East Orgalutran® Study Group.
10. Kadoch IJ, Al-Khaduri M, Phillips SJ, Lapensee L, Couturier B, Hemmings R, Bissonnette F. Spontaneous ovulation rate before oocyte retrieval in modified natural cycle IVF with and without indomethacin. Reprod Biomed Online 2008, 16:245-249. 10.1016/S1472-6483(10)60581-0, 18284881.
11. Bauman R, Mihaljevic D, Kupesic S, Kurjak A. In vitro fertilization in spontaneous cycles-our experience. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2002, 102:184-187. 10.1016/S0301-2115(01)00594-2, 11950488.
12. Huirne JA, Homburg R, Lambalk CB. Are GnRH antagonists comparable to agonists for use in IVF?. Hum Reprod 2007, 22:2805-2813. 10.1093/humrep/dem270, 17872909.
13. Bodri D, Sunkara SK, Coomarasamy A. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonists versus antagonists for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation in oocyte donors: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril 2011, 95:164-169. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.06.068, 20684954.
14. Olivennes F, Belaisch-Allart J, Emperaire JC, Dechaud H, Alvarez S, Moreau L, Nicollet B, Zorn JR, Bouchard P, Frydman R. Prospective, randomized, controlled study of in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer with a single dose of a luteinizing hormone-releasing hormone (LH-RH) antagonist (cetrorelix) or a depot formula of an LH-RH agonist (triptorelin). Fertil Steril 2000, 73:314-320. 10.1016/S0015-0282(99)00524-5, 10685535.
15. Griesinger G, Felberbaum RE, Schultze-Mosgau A, Diedrich K. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonists for assisted reproductive techniques: are there clinical differences between agents?. Drugs 2004, 64:563-575. 10.2165/00003495-200464060-00001, 15018588.
16. Fauser BC, Devroey P. Why is the clinical acceptance of gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist cotreatment during ovarian hyperstimulation for in vitro fertilization so slow?. Fertil Steril 2005, 83:1607-1611. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.02.011, 15950626.
17. Griesinger G, Felberbaum R, Diedrich K. GnRH antagonists in ovarian stimulation: a treatment regimen of clinicians' second choice? Data from the German national IVF registry. Hum Reprod 2005, 20:2373-2375. 10.1093/humrep/dei086, 15932915.
18. Simon C, Oberye J, Bellver J, Vidal C, Bosch E, Horcajadas JA, Murphy C, Adams S, Riesewijk A, Mannaerts B, Pellicer A. Similar endometrial development in oocyte donors treated with either high- or standard-dose GnRH antagonist compared to treatment with a GnRH agonist or in natural cycles. Hum Reprod 2005, 20:3318-3327. 10.1093/humrep/dei243, 16085660.
19. Martinez-Conejero JA, Simon C, Pellicer A, Horcajadas JA. Is ovarian stimulation detrimental to the endometrium?. Reprod Biomed Online 2007, 15:45-50.
20. Pu D, Wu J, Liu J. Comparisons of GnRH antagonist versus GnRH agonist protocol in poor ovarian responders undergoing IVF. Hum Reprod 2011, 26:2742-2749. 10.1093/humrep/der240, 21778283.
21. Takahashi K, Mukaida T, Tomiyama T, Goto T, Oka C. GnRH antagonist improved blastocyst quality and pregnancy outcome after multiple failures of IVF/ICSI-ET with a GnRH agonist protocol. J Assist Reprod Genet 2004, 21:317-322.
22. Maheshwari A, Gibreel A, Siristatidis CS, Bhattacharya S. Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist protocols for pituitary suppression in assisted reproduction. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2011, CD006919.
23. Humaidan P, Papanikolaou EG, Kyrou D, Alsbjerg B, Polyzos NP, Devroey P, Fatemi HM. The luteal phase after GnRH-agonist triggering of ovulation: present and future perspectives. Reprod Biomed Online 2012, 24:134-141. 10.1016/j.rbmo.2011.11.001, 22197130.
24. Brus L, Lambalk CB, de Koning J, Helder MN, Janssens RM, Schoemaker J. Specific gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogue binding predominantly in human luteinized follicular aspirates and not in human pre-ovulatory follicles. Hum Reprod 1997, 12:769-773. 10.1093/humrep/12.4.769, 9159440.
25. Cheung LW, Wong AS. Gonadotropin-releasing hormone: GnRH receptor signaling in extrapituitary tissues. FEBS J 2008, 275:5479-5495. 10.1111/j.1742-4658.2008.06677.x, 18959738.
26. Otsuki J, Okada A, Morimoto K, Nagai Y, Kubo H. The relationship between pregnancy outcome and smooth endoplasmic reticulum clusters in MII human oocytes. Hum Reprod 2004, 19:1591-1597. 10.1093/humrep/deh258, 15180981.
27. De Sutter P, Dozortsev D, Qian C, Dhont M. Oocyte morphology does not correlate with fertilization rate and embryo quality after intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Hum Reprod 1996, 11:595-597. 10.1093/HUMREP/11.3.595, 8671274.
28. Alikani M, Palermo G, Adler A, Bertoli M, Blake M, Cohen J. Intracytoplasmic sperm injection in dysmorphic human oocytes. Zygote 1995, 3:283-288.
29. Yakin K, Balaban B, Isiklar A, Urman B. Oocyte dysmorphism is not associated with aneuploidy in the developing embryo. Fertil Steril 2007, 88:811-816. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2006.12.031, 17331507.
30. Balaban B, Urman B. Effect of oocyte morphology on embryo development and implantation. Reprod Biomed Online 2006, 12:608-615. 10.1016/S1472-6483(10)61187-X, 16790106.
31. Van Blerkom J, Henry G. Oocyte dysmorphism and aneuploidy in meiotically mature human oocytes after ovarian stimulation. Hum Reprod 1992, 7:379-390.
32. Balaban B, Urman B, Sertac A, Alatas C, Aksoy S, Mercan R. Oocyte morphology does not affect fertilization rate, embryo quality and implantation rate after intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Hum Reprod 1998, 13:3431-3433. 10.1093/humrep/13.12.3431, 9886529.
33. Xia P. Intracytoplasmic sperm injection: correlation of oocyte grade based on polar body, perivitelline space and cytoplasmic inclusions with fertilization rate and embryo quality. Hum Reprod 1997, 12:1750-1755. 10.1093/humrep/12.8.1750, 9308806.
34. Balaban B, Ata B, Isiklar A, Yakin K, Urman B. Severe cytoplasmic abnormalities of the oocyte decrease cryosurvival and subsequent embryonic development of cryopreserved embryos. Hum Reprod 2008, 23:1778-1785. 10.1093/humrep/den127, 18477573.
35. Ebner T, Moser M, Tews G. Is oocyte morphology prognostic of embryo developmental potential after ICSI?. Reprod Biomed Online 2006, 12:507-512. 10.1016/S1472-6483(10)62006-8, 16740226.
36. Ebner T, Yaman C, Moser M, Sommergruber M, Feichtinger O, Tews G. Prognostic value of first polar body morphology on fertilization rate and embryo quality in intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Hum Reprod 2000, 15:427-430. 10.1093/humrep/15.2.427, 10655316.
37. Ten J, Mendiola J, Vioque J, de Juan J, Bernabeu R. Donor oocyte dysmorphisms and their influence on fertilization and embryo quality. Reprod Biomed Online 2007, 14:40-48.
38. Serhal PF, Ranieri DM, Kinis A, Marchant S, Davies M, Khadum IM. Oocyte morphology predicts outcome of intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Hum Reprod 1997, 12:1267-1270. 10.1093/humrep/12.6.1267, 9222015.
39. Kahraman S, Yakin K, Donmez E, Samli H, Bahce M, Cengiz G, Sertyel S, Samli M, Imirzalioglu N. Relationship between granular cytoplasm of oocytes and pregnancy outcome following intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Hum Reprod 2000, 15:2390-2393. 10.1093/humrep/15.11.2390, 11056140.
40. Meriano JS, Alexis J, Visram-Zaver S, Cruz M, Casper RF. Tracking of oocyte dysmorphisms for ICSI patients may prove relevant to the outcome in subsequent patient cycles. Hum Reprod 2001, 16:2118-2123. 10.1093/humrep/16.10.2118, 11574502.
41. Farhi J, Nahum H, Weissman A, Zahalka N, Glezerman M, Levran D. Coarse granulation in the perivitelline space and IVF-ICSI outcome. J Assist Reprod Genet 2002, 19:545-549. 10.1023/A:1021243530358, 12503885.
42. Ebner T, Moser M, Sommergruber M, Gaiswinkler U, Shebl O, Jesacher K, Tews G. Occurrence and developmental consequences of vacuoles throughout preimplantation development. Fertil Steril 2005, 83:1635-1640. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.02.009, 15950630.
43. Otsuki J, Nagai Y, Chiba K. Lipofuscin bodies in human oocytes as an indicator of oocyte quality. J Assist Reprod Genet 2007, 24:263-270. 10.1007/s10815-007-9130-0, 17653849.
44. Wilding M, Di Matteo L, D'Andretti S, Montanaro N, Capobianco C, Dale B. An oocyte score for use in assisted reproduction. J Assist Reprod Genet 2007, 24:350-358. 10.1007/s10815-007-9143-8, 17629723.
45. Navarro PA, de Araujo MM, de Araujo CM, Rocha M, dos Reis R, Martins W. Relationship between first polar body morphology before intracytoplasmic sperm injection and fertilization rate, cleavage rate, and embryo quality. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2009, 104:226-229. 10.1016/j.ijgo.2008.11.008, 19105998.
46. Setti AS, Figueira RC, Braga DP, Colturato SS, Iaconelli A, Borges E. Relationship between oocyte abnormal morphology and intracytoplasmic sperm injection outcomes: a meta-analysis. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2011, 159:364-370. 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2011.07.031, 21824710.
47. Rienzi L, Vajta G, Ubaldi F. Predictive value of oocyte morphology in human IVF: a systematic review of the literature. Hum Reprod Update 2011, 17:34-45. 10.1093/humupd/dmq029, 3001337, 20639518.
48. Hassan-Ali H, Hisham-Saleh A, El-Gezeiry D, Baghdady I, Ismaeil I, Mandelbaum J. Perivitelline space granularity: a sign of human menopausal gonadotrophin overdose in intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Hum Reprod 1998, 13:3425-3430. 10.1093/humrep/13.12.3425, 9886528.
49. Ciotti PM, Notarangelo L, Morselli-Labate AM, Felletti V, Porcu E, Venturoli S. First polar body morphology before ICSI is not related to embryo quality or pregnancy rate. Hum Reprod 2004, 19:2334-2339. 10.1093/humrep/deh433, 15347596.
50. De Santis L, Cino I, Rabellotti E, Calzi F, Persico P, Borini A, Coticchio G. Polar body morphology and spindle imaging as predictors of oocyte quality. Reprod Biomed Online 2005, 11:36-42. 10.1016/S1472-6483(10)61296-5, 16102284.
51. Chamayou S, Ragolia C, Alecci C, Storaci G, Maglia E, Russo E, Guglielmino A. Meiotic spindle presence and oocyte morphology do not predict clinical ICSI outcomes: a study of 967 transferred embryos. Reprod Biomed Online 2006, 13:661-667. 10.1016/S1472-6483(10)60656-6, 17169176.
52. Figueira RCS, Braga DPAF, Semiao-Francisco L, Madaschi C, Iaconelli A, Borges E. Metaphase II human oocyte morphology: contributing factors and effects on fertilization potential and embryo developmental ability in ICSI cycles. Fertil Steril 2010, 94:1115-1117. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.11.039, 20045105.
53. Loutradis D, Drakakis P, Kallianidis K, Milingos S, Dendrinos S, Michalas S. Oocyte morphology correlates with embryo quality and pregnancy rate after intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Fertil Steril 1999, 72:240-244. 10.1016/S0015-0282(99)00233-2, 10438988.
54. Mikkelsen AL, Lindenberg S. Morphology of in-vitro matured oocytes: impact on fertility potential and embryo quality. Hum Reprod 2001, 16:1714-1718. 10.1093/humrep/16.8.1714, 11473970.
55. Uhm SJ, Gupta MK, Yang JH, Chung HJ, Min TS, Lee HT. Epidermal growth factor can be used in lieu of follicle-stimulating hormone for nuclear maturation of porcine oocytes in vitro. Theriogenology 2010, 73:1024-1036. 10.1016/j.theriogenology.2009.11.029, 20106515.
56. Chen X, Zhou B, Yan J, Xu B, Tai P, Li J, Peng S, Zhang M, Xia G. Epidermal growth factor receptor activation by protein kinase C is necessary for FSH-induced meiotic resumption in porcine cumulus-oocyte complexes. J Endocrinol 2008, 197:409-419. 10.1677/JOE-07-0592, 18434371.
57. Yang J, Fu M, Wang S, Chen X, Ning G, Xu B, Ma Y, Zhang M. An antisense oligodeoxynucleotide to the LH receptor attenuates FSH-induced oocyte maturation in mice. Asian-Aust J Anim Sci 2008, 21:972-979.
58. Wang C, Xu B, Zhou B, Zhang C, Yang J, Ouyang H, Ning G, Zhang M, Shen J, Xia G. Reducing CYP51 inhibits follicle-stimulating hormone induced resumption of mouse oocyte meiosis in vitro. J Lipid ResJ Lipid Res 2009, 50:2164-2172.
59. Franco JG, Baruffi RL, Oliveira JB, Mauri AL, Petersen CG, Contart P, Felipe V. Effects of recombinant LH supplementation to recombinant FSH during induced ovarian stimulation in the GnRH-agonist protocol: a matched case-control study. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2009, 7:58. 10.1186/1477-7827-7-58, 2701434, 19497101.
60. Caserta D, Lisi F, Marci R, Ciardo F, Fazi A, Lisi R, Moscarini M. Does supplementation with recombinant luteinizing hormone prevent ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome in down regulated patients undergoing recombinant follicle stimulating hormone multiple follicular stimulation for IVF/ET and reduces cancellation rate for high risk of hyperstimulation?. Gynecol Endocrinol 2011, 27:862-866. 10.3109/09513590.2010.544133, 21391759.
61. Ruvolo G, Bosco L, Pane A, Morici G, Cittadini E, Roccheri MC. Lower apoptosis rate in human cumulus cells after administration of recombinant luteinizing hormone to women undergoing ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization procedures. Fertil Steril 2007, 87:542-546. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2006.06.059, 17126339.
62. Detti L, Ambler DR, Yelian FD, Kruger ML, Diamond MP, Puscheck EE. Timing and duration of use of GnRH antagonist down-regulation for IVF/ICSI cycles have no impact on oocyte quality or pregnancy outcomes. J Assist Reprod Genet 2008, 25:177-181. 10.1007/s10815-008-9217-2, 2582065, 18461435.
63. Acevedo B, Sanchez M, Gomez JL, Cuadros J, Ricciarelli E, Hernandez ER. Luteinizing hormone supplementation increases pregnancy rates in gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist donor cycles. Fertil Steril 2004, 82:343-347. 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2004.03.020, 15302282.
64. Hernandez ER. Embryo implantation and GnRH antagonists: embryo implantation: the Rubicon for GnRH antagonists. Hum Reprod 2000, 15:1211-1216. 10.1093/humrep/15.6.1211, 10831542.
65. Aguiar LP, Moraes LM, Lamita RM, Marinho RM, Caetano JPJ. Correlação entre a morfologia do oócito e o desenvolvimento embrionário: Proposta de escore para qualidade embrionária. Reprod Hum 2003, 3:19-24.