Analysis of cumulative live birth rate and perinatal outcomes in young patients with low anti-müllerian hormone levels using two ovulation promotion protocols: A cohort study.

Abstract

ObjectiveTo compare cumulative live birth rates and perinatal outcomes of young IVF/ICSI patients with low anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) levels on a gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist (GnRH-ant) regimen with those on a high progesterone state of ovulation (PPOS) regimen.MethodsWe retrospectively analyzed 798 patients who underwent in vitro fertilization (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm microinjection (ICSI) between January 2015 and December 2020 at the Third Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou University. A total of 798 cycles of complete clinical data from patients who underwent in vitro fertilization (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) at the Reproductive Medicine Center of Zhengzhou University Hospital between January 2015 and December 2020 and were eligible for AMH < 1.2 ng/ml at age < 35 years, Group A1: very low AMH levels (AMH < 0.5 ng/mL) and GnRH antagonist regimen; Group A2, very low AMH level (AMH < 0.5 ng/mL) and PPOS regimen; Group B1, low AMH level (0.5 ng/mL ≤ AMH < 1.2 ng/mL) and GnRH antagonist regimen; and Group B2, low AMH level (0.5 ng/mL ≤ AMH < 1.2 ng/mL), and the PPOS regimen.ResultsAt very low levels of AMH (< 0.5 ng/mL), the CLBR of the GnRH antagonist regimen was not significantly different from that of the PPOS regimen (P > 0.05), at 0.5 ng/mL ≤ AMH < 1.2 ng/mL. Statistics showed that the CLBR of the GnRH antagonist regimen was significantly higher than that of the PPOS regimen (49.7% vs. 35.7%, P=0.002). Logistic regression analysis showed that in Group A: the younger the female partner, the higher the CLBR (OR = 0.972, 95% CI = 0.923–1.042, P = 0.022), and the more the AFC, the higher the CLBR (OR = 1.166, 95% CI = 1.091–1.336, P < 0.001). Group B: the higher the number of good-quality embryos, the higher the CLBR (OR = 2.227, 95% CI = 1.869–2.654, P < 0.001). Compared with PPOS regimens, the antagonist regimen was able to increase the CLBR. The analysis of Group A showed that the antagonist regimen had a shorter TTP than the PPOS regimen (P < 0.001); however, the PPOS regimen had a lower cost of ovulation (4311.91 vs. 4903.81, P = 0.023). The antagonist regimen in Group B had a shorter TTP than the PPOS regimen, and there was no significant difference in the cost of ovulation. In the analysis of perinatal outcomes, there were no statistically significant differences in preterm birth, low birth weight, very low birth weight, and pregnancy complications among the four groups.ConclusionYoung patients with very low AMH levels (< 0. 5 ng/mL), the GnRH antagonist regimen was comparable to the PPOS regimen in CLBR outcomes; the antagonist regimen shortens the time to clinical pregnancy, and the PPOS regimen is more cost-effective. In young patients with low AMH levels of 0.5 ng/mL and <1.2 ng/mL, the GnRH antagonist regimen can more appropriate to improve CLBR, and the perinatal outcomes were similar for both regimens.