P–602 Pregnancy outcomes of progestin primed ovarian stimulation protocol, GnRH antagonist protocol and GnRH agonist protocol for young patients undergoing PGT-M

Abstract

\n \n \n To investigate the pregnancy outcomes of progestin primed ovarian stimulation protocol, GnRH antagonist protocol and GnRH agonist protocol for young patients undergoing preimplantation genetic testing for monogenic gene diseases.\n \n \n \n PPOS protocol could reduce the normal chromosome formation and further development potential of embryos, suggesting that the PPOS protocol should be used cautiously.\n \n \n \n GnRH antagonist protocol (GnRHant) and GnRH agonist protocol (GnRHa) have been used in clinic for many years as routine regimens, and their ovarian stimulation effects and pregnancy outcomes have been confirmed by a large number of literatures. As a new protocol in recent years, the reports of pregnancy outcomes of progestin primed ovarian stimulation protocol (PPOS) are inconsistent.\n \n \n \n This retrospective cohort study was performed in a reproduction center from a tertiary hospital between September 2018 and November 2020 which included 147 young patients (<35 year old) undergoing preimplantation genetic testing for monogenic gene diseases (PGT-M) after stimulated by progestin primed ovarian stimulation protocol (n\u2009=\u200944), GnRH antagonist protocol (n\u2009=\u200960) or GnRH agonist protocol (n\u2009=\u200943).\n \n \n \n This study included 147 young patients (<35 year old) undergoing preimplantation genetic testing for monogenic gene diseases (PGT-M) after stimulated by progestin primed ovarian stimulation protocol (PPOS, n\u2009=\u200944), GnRH antagonist protocol (GnRHant, n\u2009=\u200960) or GnRH agonist protocol (GnRHa, n\u2009=\u200943). The primary outcomes were normal karyotype embryo rate and live birth rate. The embryological and clinical outcomes were measured.\n \n \n \n Basic characteristics such as infertility duration, age, and body mass index (BMI) were comparable in study groups. No significant difference was found in the number oocytes retrieved or viable embryos between the groups.\n Normal karyotype embryo rate of PPOS protocol was significantly lower than GnRHant and GnRHa protocol (57.6% for PPOS vs 76.0% for GnRHant vs 67.3% for GnRHa).\n No significant difference were found in chemical pregnancy rate (77.3% for PPOS vs 73.3% for GnRHant vs 74.4% for GnRHa) or clinical pregnancy rate (69.8% for PPOS vs 71.7% for GnRHant vs 72.5% for GnRHa). While live birth rate of PPOS protocol was significantly lower than GnRHant and GnRHa protocol ( 45.5% for PPOS vs 58.3% for GnRHant vs 72.2% for GnRHa).\n \n \n \n This is a preliminary study which needs to be further confirmed by large-scale clinical studies.\n Wider implications of the findings: Although this is a preliminary study which needs to be further confirmed by large-scale clinical studies, the current results suggest that the application of PPOS should be cautious.\n \n \n \n -\n