MedElevator
Войти в исследования Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026
Comparison of euploidy rates between progestin-primed ovarian stimulation and GnRH antagonist protocols: a single-center study in a mixed-ethnicity population.
СтатьяСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ingold Caroline, Dos Santos Giovanna Giovacchini, Barbosa Caio Parente, De Oliveira Renato
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: To compare the euploidy rate between ovulation suppression protocols using PPOS and GnRH-ant, and to evaluate possible variables associated with euploidy rate such as age, BMI, infertility duration, treatment-related factors, and semen parameters, in a genetically admixed Brazilian population underrepresented in reproductive medicine research.
DESIGN: This was a retrospective non-inferiority case-control study including 268 IVF cycles, conducted between 2021 and 2022. Subjects: A total of 268 in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles were included, all with indication for preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A), of which 64.5% (n = 173) were included in the PPOS group, and 35.5% (n = 95) in the GnRH-ant group. A statistical power of 85% was achieved for the primary outcome.
EXPOSURE: Patients underwent controlled ovarian stimulation using either progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) or GnRH antagonist (GnRH-ant) protocols.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the euploidy rate in PPOS and GnRH-ant groups.
RESULTS: No significant differences were observed in euploidy rate between the PPOS and GnRH-ant groups (25.9% vs. 27.5%; p = 0.865; r = 0.01). In the adjusted analysis, stimulation protocol was not significantly associated with euploidy rate (coefficient = 3.38; 95% CI: -14.26 to 16.03), whereas maternal age remained significantly and negatively associated with the outcome (coefficient = -7.83; 95% CI: -11.85 to -3.81). Fertilization rate was higher in the GnRH-ant group (p = 0.004), but this did not affect embryo formation or euploidy outcomes. Paternal age and semen parameters were not significantly associated with euploidy.
CONCLUSION: According to the prespecified criterion, PPOS met the formal criterion for non-inferiority in relation to GnRH-ant regarding euploidy rate, although with limited margin. These findings support PPOS as a viable option in freeze-all/PGT-A cycles, but they should be interpreted with caution given the retrospective design and baseline differences between groups.
DESIGN: This was a retrospective non-inferiority case-control study including 268 IVF cycles, conducted between 2021 and 2022. Subjects: A total of 268 in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles were included, all with indication for preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy (PGT-A), of which 64.5% (n = 173) were included in the PPOS group, and 35.5% (n = 95) in the GnRH-ant group. A statistical power of 85% was achieved for the primary outcome.
EXPOSURE: Patients underwent controlled ovarian stimulation using either progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) or GnRH antagonist (GnRH-ant) protocols.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the euploidy rate in PPOS and GnRH-ant groups.
RESULTS: No significant differences were observed in euploidy rate between the PPOS and GnRH-ant groups (25.9% vs. 27.5%; p = 0.865; r = 0.01). In the adjusted analysis, stimulation protocol was not significantly associated with euploidy rate (coefficient = 3.38; 95% CI: -14.26 to 16.03), whereas maternal age remained significantly and negatively associated with the outcome (coefficient = -7.83; 95% CI: -11.85 to -3.81). Fertilization rate was higher in the GnRH-ant group (p = 0.004), but this did not affect embryo formation or euploidy outcomes. Paternal age and semen parameters were not significantly associated with euploidy.
CONCLUSION: According to the prespecified criterion, PPOS met the formal criterion for non-inferiority in relation to GnRH-ant regarding euploidy rate, although with limited margin. These findings support PPOS as a viable option in freeze-all/PGT-A cycles, but they should be interpreted with caution given the retrospective design and baseline differences between groups.