HEALTH OF WOMAN. 2019.1(137):128–132; doi 10.15574/HW.2019.137.128

Strelko G. V., Ulanova V. V.
Medical center «IVMED», Kiev

The objective: study of the influence of plasma progesterone (P4) levels on the pregnancy rate in egg donation ATR cycles with euploid embryos cryotransfer in poor responders woman.

Materials and methods. Analysis of protocols of endometrium preparation for cryotransfer in egg donation ATR cycles with euploid embryos in poor responder women: 56 in the cycles of replacement hormonal therapy (HRT) and 34 in the natural cycle. Only genetically tested embryos were studied by the NGS method. Preparation of endometrium in the HRT cycle was performed with estradiol valerate (E2) until the thickness of the endometrium was 8 mm. Progesterones were administered in a standard dose. In the natural cycle, when the dominant follicle reaching of 20 mm in diameter, a trigger for the final maturation of the oocytes – human chorionic gonadotrophin – was administrated and the luteal phase was supplemented with progestins in a standard dose. On the day of the transfer, a comparative analysis of the plasma level of estradiol and progesterone by an immunochemical ELISA method on a Cobas 6000 analyzer (e601-modules) with Roche Diagnostics (Switzerland) was performed.

Results. Plasma estradiol levels did not differ in 2 clinical groups, as well as endometrial thickness and length of the follicular phase of a cycle. Plasma progesterone levels on the day the transfer were significantly different in the 2 clinical groups and was significantly higher in the group of the natural cycle. The level of progesterone in the 1st clinical group was less than 10 ng/ml in 31% of patients. The frequency of miscarriage was slightly higher in the HRT group, but not significantly different and was observed more frequently in women with lower levels of progesterone. The frequency of withdrawal from the program did not differ in 2 clinical groups.

Conclusion. The ambiguity of the results obtained and the small number of cases studied require a further study of the effect of the plasma concentration of progesterone on the pregnancy rate in egg donation ATR cycles with euploid embryos cryotransfer in poor responders woman.

Key words: assisted reproductive technologies, cryotransfer, donor oocytes, poor responders, luteal phase support, progesterone.

REFERENCES

1. Baker VL, Jones CA, Doody K, Foulk R, Yee B, Adamson GD, Cometti B, DeVane G, Hubert G, Trevisan S et al. (2014). A randomized, controlled trial comparing the efficacy and safety of aqueous subcutaneous progesterone with vaginal progesterone for luteal phase support of in vitro fertilization. Hum Reprod. 29:2212–2220. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deu194; PMid:25100106 PMCid:PMC4164149

2. Barbosa MW, Silva LR, Navarro PA, Ferriani RA, Nastri CO, Martins WP. (2015). Dydrogesterone versus progesterone for luteal-phase support: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 48:161–170. https://doi.org/10.1002/uog.15814; PMid:26577241

3. Chakravarty BN, ShirazeeHH, DamP, Goswami SK, ChatterjeeR, Ghosh S. (2005). Oral dydrogesterone versus intravaginal micronised progesterone as luteal phase supportin assisted reproductive technology (ART) cycles: results of arandomisedstudy. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol. 97:416–420. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsbmb.2005.08.012; PMid:16213136

4. Chambers GM, Hoang VP, Zhu R, Illingworth PJ. (2012). A reduction in public funding for fertility treatment – an econometric analysis of access to treatment and savings to government. BMC Health Serv Res. 12:142. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6963-12-142; PMid:22682009 PMCid:PMC3464128

5. Davies MJ, Moore VM, Willson KJ, Van EP, Priest K, Scott H, Haan EA, Chan A. (2012). Reproductive technologies and the risk of birth defects. N Engl J Med 366:1803–1813. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMoa1008095; PMid:22559061

6. Doody KJ, Schnell VL, Foulk RA, Miller CE, Kolb BA, Blake EJ, Yankov VI. (2009). Endometrin for luteal phase support in a randomized, controlled, openlabel, prospective in-vitro fertilization trial using a combination of Menopur and Bravelle for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation. Fertil Steril 91:1012–1017. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.01.069; PMid:18371963

7. Dyer S, Chambers GM, de Mouzon J, Nygren KG, Zegers-Hochschild F, Mansour R, Ishihara O, Banker M, Adamson GD. International Committee for Monitoring Assisted Reproductive Technologies world report: Assisted Reproductive Technology 2008, 2009 and 2010.

8. Fatemi HM, Bourgain C, Donoso P, Blockeel C, Papanikolaou EG, Popovic-Todorovic B, Devroey P. (2007). Effect of oral administration of dydrogestrone versus vaginal administration of natural micronized progesterone on the secretory transformation of endometrium and luteal endocrine profile in patients with premature ovarian failure: a proof of concept. Hum Reprod 22:1260–1263. Hum Reprod 31:1588–1609. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/del520; PMid:17227809

9. Ganesh A, Chakravorty N, Mukherjee R, Goswami S, Chaudhury K, Chakravarty B. (2011). Comparison of oral dydrogestrone with progesterone gel and micronized progesterone for luteal support in 1,373 women undergoing in vitro fertilization: a randomized clinical study. Fertil Steril 95:1961–1965. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.01.148; PMid:21333984

10. Kupferminc MJ, Lessing JB, Amit A, Yovel I, David MP, Peyser MR. (1990). A prospective randomized trial of human chorionic gonadotrophin or dydrogesterone support following in-vitro fertilization and embryo transfer. Hum Reprod 5:271–273. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a137087; PMid:2351709

11. Lockwood G, Griesinger G, Cometti B. (2014). Subcutaneous progesterone versus vaginal progesterone gel for luteal phase support in in vitro fertilization: a noninferiority randomized controlledstudy. Fertil Steril 101:112–119. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.09.010; PMid:24140033

12. Ludwig M, Schwartz P, Babahan B, Katalinic A, Weiss JM, Felberbaum R, Al-Hasani S, Diedrich K. (2002). Luteal phase support using either Crinone 8% or Utrogest: results of a prospective, randomized study. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 103:48–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-2115(02)00010-6

13. Mirza FG, Patki A, Pexman-Fieth C. (2016). Dydrogesterone use in early pregnancy. Gynecol Endocrinol 32:97–106. Palomba S, Santagni S, La Sala GB. 2015. Progesterone administration for luteal phase deficiency in human reproduction: an old or new issue? J Ovarian Res 8:77. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13048-015-0205-8; PMid:26585269 PMCid:PMC4653859

14. Queisser-Luft A. (2009). Dydrogesterone use during pregnancy: overview of birth defects reported since 1977. Early Hum Dev 85:375–377. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2008.12.016; PMid:19193503

15. Saharkhiz N, Zamaniyan M, Salehpour S, Zadehmodarres S, Hoseini S, Cheraghi L, Seif S, Baheiraei N. (2016). A comparative study of dydrogesterone and micronized progesteroneforluteal phase support duringin vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles. Gynecol Endocrinol 32:213–217. https://doi.org/10.3109/09513590.2015.1110136; PMid:26486011

16. Salehpour S, Tamimi M, Saharkhiz N. (2013). Comparison of oral dydrogesterone with suppository vaginal progesterone for luteal-phase support in in vitro fertilization (IVF): a randomized clinical trial. Iran J Reprod Med 11:913–918.

17. Schindler AE. (2009). Progestational effects of dydrogesterone in vitro, in vivo and on the human endometrium. Maturitas 65:S3–S11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.maturitas.2009.10.011; PMid:19969432