Scholarlink

Background <p>Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) has emerged as an alternative to GnRH-antagonist protocols in IVF, yet its impact on embryo chromosomal competence remains controversial. Evidence is particularly limited regarding whether PPOS influences blastocyst euploidy rates and key clinical outcomes in PGT-A cycles, and whether these effects vary according to maternal age and ovarian reserve status.</p> Methods <p>This retrospective cohort study included 1,843 PGT-A cycles (666 PPOS, 1,177 GnRH antagonist) performed at a single tertiary IVF center between January 2016 and January 2024. Controlled ovarian stimulation was performed with either oral medroxyprogesterone acetate or daily cetrorelix, followed by vitrification of all biopsied blastocysts and subsequent frozen embryo transfer. Primary outcomes were blastocyst euploidy and clinical pregnancy rates. Secondary outcomes included embryological parameters, miscarriage, live birth, and cumulative pregnancy rates. Subgroup analyses were performed according to maternal age and ovarian reserve.</p> Results <p>The mean age was 37.64±4.48 years in the PPOS group and 37.80±3.49 years in the GnRH-antagonist group; age and other baseline characteristics were comparable between groups. PPOS cycles had a shorter stimulation duration (median 8 vs. 9 days, <i>p</i> = 0.001), with comparable gonadotropin requirements and embryological outcomes. Euploidy (32.6% vs. 32.1%, <i>p</i> = 0.653), mosaicism, and aneuploidy rates did not differ significantly. Clinical pregnancy, live birth, and cumulative pregnancy rates were equivalent. </p> Conclusion <p>PPOS and GnRH antagonist protocols yield comparable embryological and clinical outcomes in PGT-A cycles, including in advanced maternal age and diminished ovarian reserve subgroups. With its shorter stimulation duration and cost-effectiveness, PPOS is a valid alternative when fresh transfer is not planned.</p>

错误：搜索内容不能为空，请输入英文关键词
错误：关键词超出字数限制，请精简
高级检索

Evaluating progestin-primed and GnRH antagonist ovarian stimulation protocols in PGT-A cycles: implications for clinical practice

  • 期刊论文

  • 出版模式：

    开放获取

  • 发表日期：

    2026年6月30日

查看全文
  • Burak Elmas,
  • Ozge Karaosmanoglu,
  • Aysen Yuceturk,
  • Ilke Ozer Aslan,
  • Burcu Aksu Turan,
  • Nuri Peker,
  • Omur Albayrak,
  • Hakan Berkil,
  • Bulent Tiras

摘要

Background

Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) has emerged as an alternative to GnRH-antagonist protocols in IVF, yet its impact on embryo chromosomal competence remains controversial. Evidence is particularly limited regarding whether PPOS influences blastocyst euploidy rates and key clinical outcomes in PGT-A cycles, and whether these effects vary according to maternal age and ovarian reserve status.

Methods

This retrospective cohort study included 1,843 PGT-A cycles (666 PPOS, 1,177 GnRH antagonist) performed at a single tertiary IVF center between January 2016 and January 2024. Controlled ovarian stimulation was performed with either oral medroxyprogesterone acetate or daily cetrorelix, followed by vitrification of all biopsied blastocysts and subsequent frozen embryo transfer. Primary outcomes were blastocyst euploidy and clinical pregnancy rates. Secondary outcomes included embryological parameters, miscarriage, live birth, and cumulative pregnancy rates. Subgroup analyses were performed according to maternal age and ovarian reserve.

Results

The mean age was 37.64±4.48 years in the PPOS group and 37.80±3.49 years in the GnRH-antagonist group; age and other baseline characteristics were comparable between groups. PPOS cycles had a shorter stimulation duration (median 8 vs. 9 days, p = 0.001), with comparable gonadotropin requirements and embryological outcomes. Euploidy (32.6% vs. 32.1%, p = 0.653), mosaicism, and aneuploidy rates did not differ significantly. Clinical pregnancy, live birth, and cumulative pregnancy rates were equivalent.

Conclusion

PPOS and GnRH antagonist protocols yield comparable embryological and clinical outcomes in PGT-A cycles, including in advanced maternal age and diminished ovarian reserve subgroups. With its shorter stimulation duration and cost-effectiveness, PPOS is a valid alternative when fresh transfer is not planned.