Letrozole ovulation induction: an effective option in endometrial preparation for frozen–thawed embryo transfer
- 965 Downloads
To evaluate the clinical efficacy of letrozole on ovulation induction and hormone replacement therapy (HRT) during endometrial preparation for frozen–thawed embryo transfer (FET).
We analyzed totally 1,230 cycles of patients that underwent FET from October 2010 to September 2012. Seven hundred and thirteen cycles of patients with ovulation disorders that underwent FET were randomly assigned to two groups by case control study. 359 cycles received letrozole ovulation induction and 354 cycles received HRT during endometrial preparation for FET, respectively. In the corresponding period, 517 cycles of patients with normal ovulation in the natural cycle group for FET endometrial preparation served as controls. Reproduction-related clinical outcomes of patients in the three groups were compared.
The embryo implantation rate of patients in letrozole group (30.4 %) was significantly higher than the HRT group (22.8 %, P < 0.05). The clinical pregnancy rate of patients in the letrozole group (53.2 %) was significantly higher than the HRT group (44.4 %, P < 0.05), while no significant difference was observed between the letrozole and natural cycle groups (51.3 %, P > 0.05). Estradiol levels on the day of human chorionic gonadotropin administration in the letrozole group were significantly lower than those in the natural cycle group (280.32 ± 125.39 pg/ml and 351.06 ± 123.03 pg/ml, respectively; P < 0.05). The live birth rate of patients in letrozole group (44.6 %) was significantly higher than the HRT group (32.5 %, P < 0.05), while abortion rate (12.0 %) was significantly lower than the HRT group (21.0 %, P < 0.05). There were no significant differences in number of mature follicles, endometrial thickness, duration of follicle growth between the letrozole and the natural cycle groups, and there were no significant differences in twin birth rate and ectopic pregnancy rate among the three groups (all P values >0.05).
Ovulation induction with letrozole during endometrial preparation for FET has a higher rate of pregnancy success and a lower abortion rate than HRT. Letrozole treatment exhibits clinical progression and outcomes similar to those patients undergoing a natural cycle or normal ovulation cycle. Therefore, letrozole treatment may be an effective option in endometrial preparation for FET in patients with ovulation disorders or irregular menstruation.
KeywordsLetrozole Frozen–thawed embryo transfer Ovulation induction Endometrial preparation Clinical efficacy
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
- 1.Chen S, Kong L, Huang M (2000) Clinical application of frozen-thawed embryo transfer. First Military Med Univ 20:74–76Google Scholar
- 2.Zhou F, Lin XN, Tong XM, Li C, Liu L, Jin XY, Zhu HY, Zhang SY (2009) A frozen-thawed embryo transfer program improves the embryo utilization rate. Chin Med J (Engl) 122:1974–1978Google Scholar
- 5.Wu W, Mao Y, Wang W, Ding W, Huang J, Diao F, Ma Y, Liu J (2010) Comparison of the effect of different endometrial preparation methods on the clinical outcome of 1,372 frozen-thawed embryos transfer. Acta Uni Med Nanjing Nature Sci 30:1469–1474Google Scholar
- 10.Geng Q, Guo S, Quan S, Xing F (2010) Clinical observation of effects on follicular development and endometrium with letrozole for ovulation. Pract Med 26:2209–2211Google Scholar
- 14.Cummins JM, Breen TM, Harrison KL, Shaw JM, Wilson LM, Hennessey JF (1986) A formula for scoring human embryo growth rates in in vitro fertilization: its value in predicting pregnancy and in comparison with visual estimates of embryo quality. J In Vitro Fert Embryo Transf 3:284–295PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 15.Hong QQ, Cai RF, Kuang YP (2010) Study on endometrial preparation with letrozole in frozen-thawed embryo transfer. Reprod Contra 30:445–448Google Scholar
- 20.Li YF, Zhu GJ, Zhang HW (2009) Comparison of 3 methods of preparing endometrium for frozen-thawed embryo transfer. Reprod Contra 29:113–116Google Scholar