The impact of peak estradiol during controlled ovarian stimulation on the cumulative live birth rate of IVF/ICSI in non-PCOS patients
- 123 Downloads
The study aimed to investigate the impact of the peak E2 level during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COS) on the cumulative live birth rate (cLBR) in non-PCOS women with normal ovarian reserve.
Materials and methods
Women between 20 and 39 years were included. Donor cycles and patients who never experienced embryo transfer were excluded. Multivariable regression and smooth curve fitting were applied for statistical analysis.
A total of 1141 patients were included. The mean age, basal AFC, peak E2 level, and number of retrieved oocyte were 30.0 ± 3.7 years old, 16.8 ± 6.7, 3911.0 ± 1302.9 pg/ml, and 13.6 ± 5.5, respectively. In the overall population of the cohort, cLBR, miscarriage rate, and preterm birth rate were 66.9%, 7.4%, and 13.7%, respectively. The results of multivariable regression analysis failed to show the impact of peak E2 on the cLBR [OR (95%CI) 0.995 (0.982, 1.009), P = 0.486]. However, the result of smooth curve fitting indicated that when the peak E2 was lower than 2185 pg/ml, the cLBR increased about 12% with 100 pg/ml increasing of the peak E2. When the peak E2 was higher than 6136 pg/ml, the cLBR decreased about 10% with 100 pg/ml increasing of the peak E2.
We concluded that the peak E2 level on hCG trigger day is associated with the cLBR in a segmental pattern. There should be an appropriate range of the peak E2 level during COS to achieve a relative best cLBR in non-PCOS patients using stimulating protocol mainly based on GnRH agonist; however, the cutoff value must vary in different centers.
KeywordsIn vitro fertilization Cumulative live birth rate Peak estradiol Retrospective cohort study
This work was funded by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC, Grant/Award No. 81671463) and the Key Project and Development Plan-fund of Shaanxi province (Grant/Award No. 2017ZDCXL-SF-02-03).
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
- 2.De Neubourg D, Bogaerts K, Blockeel C, Coetsier T, Delvigne A, Devreker F, et al. How do cumulative live birth rates and cumulative multiple live birth rates over complete courses of assisted reproductive technology treatment per woman compare among registries? Hum Reprod (Oxford, England). 2016;31(1):93–9. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dev270.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 3.Imudia AN, Goldman RH, Awonuga AO, Wright DL, Styer AK, Toth TL. The impact of supraphysiologic serum estradiol levels on peri-implantation embryo development and early pregnancy outcome following in vitro fertilization cycles. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2014;31(1):65–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-013-0117-8.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 6.Wei M, Zhang XM, Gu FL, Lv F, Ji YR, Liu KF, et al. The impact of LH, E2, and P level of HCG administration day on outcomes of in vitro fertilization in controlled ovarian hyperstimulation. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol. 2015;42(3):361–6.Google Scholar
- 7.Siddhartha N, Reddy NS, Pandurangi M, Tamizharasi M, Radha V, Kanimozhi K. Correlation of serum estradiol level on the day of ovulation trigger with the reproductive outcome of intracytoplasmic sperm injection. J Hum Reprod Sci. 2016;9(1):23–7. https://doi.org/10.4103/0974-1208.178631.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 9.Committee Opinion No. 690: Carrier Screening in the Age of Genomic Medicine. Obstet Gynecol. 2017;129(3):e35–40. https://doi.org/10.1097/aog.0000000000001951.
- 10.Christianson MS, Shoham G, Tobler KJ, Zhao Y, Cordeiro CN, Leong M, et al. Measurement of antral follicle count in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization treatment: results of a worldwide web-based survey. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2015;32(10):1435–40. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-015-0555-6.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 11.Group EASPCW. Revised 2003 consensus on diagnostic criteria and long-term health risks related to polycystic ovary syndrome. Hum Reprod. 2004;81(1):19–25.Google Scholar
- 15.Joo BS, Park SH, An BM, Kim KS, Moon SE, Moon HS. Serum estradiol levels during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation influence the pregnancy outcome of in vitro fertilization in a concentration-dependent manner. Fertil Steril. 2010;93(2):442–6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.02.066.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 16.Pereira N, Reichman DE, Goldschlag DE, Lekovich JP, Rosenwaks Z. Impact of elevated peak serum estradiol levels during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation on the birth weight of term singletons from fresh IVF-ET cycles. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2015;32(4):527–32. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-015-0434-1.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 17.Pereira N, Elias RT, Christos PJ, Petrini AC, Hancock K, Lekovich JP, et al. Supraphysiologic estradiol is an independent predictor of low birth weight in full-term singletons born after fresh embryo transfer. Hum Reprod. 2017;32(7):1410–7. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dex095.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 18.Imudia AN, Awonuga AO, Doyle JO, Kaimal AJ, Wright DL, Toth TL, et al. Peak serum estradiol level during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation is associated with increased risk of small for gestational age and preeclampsia in singleton pregnancies after in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 2012;97(6):1374–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.03.028.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 23.Ng EH, Chan CC, Tang OS, Yeung WS, Ho PC. Comparison of endometrial and subendometrial blood flow measured by three-dimensional power Doppler ultrasound between stimulated and natural cycles in the same patients. Hum Reprod (Oxford, England). 2004;19(10):2385–90. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deh384.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 25.Kolibianakis E, Bourgain C, Albano C, Osmanagaoglu K, Smitz J, Van Steirteghem A, et al. Effect of ovarian stimulation with recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone, gonadotropin releasing hormone antagonists, and human chorionic gonadotropin on endometrial maturation on the day of oocyte pick-up. Fertil Steril. 2002;78(5):1025–9.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 26.Lee YL, Liu Y, Ng PY, Lee KF, Au CL, Ng EH, et al. Aberrant expression of angiopoietins-1 and -2 and vascular endothelial growth factor-a in peri-implantation endometrium after gonadotrophin stimulation. Hum Reprod (Oxford, England). 2008;23(4):894–903. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/den004.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 27.Zapantis G, Szmyga MJ, Rybak EA, Meier UT. Premature formation of nucleolar channel systems indicates advanced endometrial maturation following controlled ovarian hyperstimulation. Hum Reprod (Oxford, England). 2013;28(12):3292–300. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/det358.CrossRefPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
- 30.Namavar Jahromi BMD, Parsanezhad MEMD, Shomali ZMD, Bakhshai PMD, Alborzi MMD, Moin Vaziri NMDP, et al. Ovarian Hyperstimulation syndrome: a narrative review of its pathophysiology, risk factors, prevention, classification, and management. Iranian J Med Sci. 2018;43(3):248–60.Google Scholar
- 38.Luke B, Gopal D, Cabral H, Stern JE, Diop H. Adverse pregnancy, birth, and infant outcomes in twins: effects of maternal fertility status and infant gender combinations; the Massachusetts outcomes study of assisted reproductive technology. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2017;217(3):330.e1–e15. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2017.04.025.CrossRefGoogle Scholar