Clinical and Molecular Effects of GnRH Agonist and Antagonist on The Cumulus Cells in The
Apoptosis
Cumulus Cells
GnRH Antagonist
Journal
International journal of fertility & sterility
ISSN: 2008-076X
Titre abrégé: Int J Fertil Steril
Pays: Iran
ID NLM: 101487941
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Jul 2021
Jul 2021
Historique:
received:
09
09
2020
accepted:
05
12
2020
entrez:
22
6
2021
pubmed:
23
6
2021
medline:
23
6
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogues have been extensively utilized in the ovarian stimulation cycle for suppression of endogenous rapid enhancement of luteinizing hormone (LH surge). Exclusive properties and functional mechanisms of GnRH analogues in Twenty-one infertile individuals were enrolled in this study. Subjects were randomly allocated into two groups of GnRH agonist (n=10) treated patients and GnRH antagonist (n=11) treated individuals. The defined clinical embryological parameters were compared between the two groups. Expression of The mean number of cumulus oocyte complex (COC), percentage of metaphase II (MII) oocytes, grade A embryo and clinical parameters did not show noticeable differences between the two groups. Despite no considerable difference in the oocyte quality, embryo development, and clinical outcomes between the group treated with GnRH agonist and the one treated with antagonist protocol, the GnRH antagonist protocol was slightly more favorable. However, further clinical studies using molecular assessments are required to elucidate this controversial subject.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
BACKGROUND
Gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) analogues have been extensively utilized in the ovarian stimulation cycle for suppression of endogenous rapid enhancement of luteinizing hormone (LH surge). Exclusive properties and functional mechanisms of GnRH analogues in
MATERIALS AND METHODS
METHODS
Twenty-one infertile individuals were enrolled in this study. Subjects were randomly allocated into two groups of GnRH agonist (n=10) treated patients and GnRH antagonist (n=11) treated individuals. The defined clinical embryological parameters were compared between the two groups. Expression of
RESULTS
RESULTS
The mean number of cumulus oocyte complex (COC), percentage of metaphase II (MII) oocytes, grade A embryo and clinical parameters did not show noticeable differences between the two groups.
CONCLUSION
CONCLUSIONS
Despite no considerable difference in the oocyte quality, embryo development, and clinical outcomes between the group treated with GnRH agonist and the one treated with antagonist protocol, the GnRH antagonist protocol was slightly more favorable. However, further clinical studies using molecular assessments are required to elucidate this controversial subject.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34155867
doi: 10.22074/IJFS.2020.136161.1012
pmc: PMC8233926
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Pagination
202-209Informations de copyright
Copyright© by Royan Institute. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
Références
Cells. 2020 May 21;9(5):
pubmed: 32455542
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2011 Jan;28(1):31-40
pubmed: 20859762
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2001 Sep;18(9):490-8
pubmed: 11665664
PLoS One. 2014 Sep 12;9(9):e106854
pubmed: 25216031
Hum Reprod Update. 2005 Mar-Apr;11(2):162-77
pubmed: 15705959
Mol Hum Reprod. 2008 Dec;14(12):711-9
pubmed: 19028806
Gynecol Endocrinol. 2019 Apr;35(4):309-313
pubmed: 30430883
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2003 Oct 10;110(2):181-5
pubmed: 12969580
J Cell Physiol. 2020 Feb;235(2):1386-1404
pubmed: 31338842
Reprod Biomed Online. 2019 Feb;38(2):139-151
pubmed: 30593440
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2013 Jan;166(1):43-6
pubmed: 23020996
Front Neuroendocrinol. 2021 Jan;60:100876
pubmed: 33045257
Endocrinology. 2002 Sep;143(9):3405-13
pubmed: 12193553
Hum Reprod. 2004 Sep;19(9):2103-8
pubmed: 15243008
Drug Des Devel Ther. 2019 May 30;13:1855-1863
pubmed: 31239640
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2004 Sep;21(9):317-22
pubmed: 15587144
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2019 Mar;36(3):433-443
pubmed: 30627993
Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2019 Jan 4;17(1):7
pubmed: 30609935
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2013 Dec;288(6):1413-6
pubmed: 23708392
J Vet Med Sci. 2018 Aug 30;80(8):1348-1355
pubmed: 29937456
J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2003 Jul;88(7):3437-43
pubmed: 12843199
Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2012 Sep 07;10:74
pubmed: 22958786
Mol Biol Rep. 2019 Aug;46(4):3663-3670
pubmed: 31154602
Hum Reprod. 2010 May;25(5):1259-70
pubmed: 20228394
Mol Endocrinol. 2006 Jun;20(6):1300-21
pubmed: 16455817
Mol Hum Reprod. 2008 Dec;14(12):673-8
pubmed: 18996952
Balkan J Med Genet. 2016 Aug 2;19(1):5-12
pubmed: 27785402
Hypertens Res. 2020 Jan;43(1):13-22
pubmed: 31601971
Theriogenology. 2020 Oct 15;156:36-45
pubmed: 32652327
Clin Exp Reprod Med. 2019 Jun;46(2):76-86
pubmed: 31181875
Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol. 2018 Apr;57(2):194-199
pubmed: 29673660
Cell Death Dis. 2014 Mar 27;5:e1154
pubmed: 24675472
Int J Mol Sci. 2020 Mar 25;21(7):
pubmed: 32218212
J Assist Reprod Genet. 2007 Feb-Mar;24(2-3):91-7
pubmed: 17216562