ArticleAnnals of medicine2025
GnRH antagonist protocol versus long-acting GnRH agonist protocol on pregnancy outcomes in IVF/ICSI: a retrospective cohort study.
Article in Annals of medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Phenotype-driven protocol switching is associated with improved ART outcomes under constant gonadotropin dosage: a self-controlled analysis of 4,632 cycles.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Article
- Comparison of the metabolome of follicular fluid in GnRH agonist versus antagonist protocols during in vitro fertilization cycles.Journal of ovarian research · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundGonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist and long-acting GnRH agonist regimens are commonly employed for ovarian stimulation in women undergoing
methodsThis retrospective study included 575 women with primary infertility who underwent IVF/ICSI at our hospital between January 2021 and December 2022. The study included 501 women who underwent the GnRH antagonist protocol and 74 who underwent the long-acting GnRH agonist protocol. The investigated outcomes included biochemical pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, abnormal pregnancy, miscarriage, and live birth rates.
resultsUnivariate analysis found no significant differences between the GnRH antagonist and long-acting GnRH agonist protocols for biochemical pregnancy rate, clinical pregnancy rate, abnormal pregnancy rate, and miscarriage rate, whereas the GnRH antagonist protocol was associated with a lower live birth rate than the long-acting GnRH agonist protocol. After adjusting for potential confounding factors, no significant differences were found between the two protocols for biochemical pregnancy, clinical pregnancy, abnormal pregnancy, miscarriage, and live birth rates.
conclusionOur study results show that the GnRH antagonist and long-acting GnRH agonist protocols yielded comparable outcomes in terms of pregnancy outcomes. Further large-scale prospective studies are required to confirm these findings.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.