SynthesisGynecologic and obstetric investigation2026
Efficacy of Double Trigger versus hCG Trigger Alone in GnRH-Antagonist Cycles: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
Synthesis in Gynecologic and obstetric investigation, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
<p>Introduction: Triggering final oocyte maturation is a critical step in in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer (IVF-ET), especially for optimizing outcomes in patients with poor ovarian response or low oocyte maturation. The double trigger protocol, combining a GnRH agonist with human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG), has been proposed to enhance oocyte quality and improve reproductive outcomes compared to hCG alone. Our review aimed to evaluate the efficacy of the double trigger compared to hCG-only trigger on reproductive outcomes in patients undergoing IVF-ET.
methodsA systematic review and meta-analysis were conducted using PubMed, Scopus, and Google Scholar up to June 15, 2025. Studies comparing double trigger to hCG-only trigger were included. Outcomes such as the number of oocytes retrieved, MII oocytes, 2PN embryos, and day-3 top-quality embryos (TQEs) were analyzed using mean difference (MD), while clinical pregnancy rate was evaluated using odds ratio (OR). Risk of bias was assessed using RoB-2 and ROBINS-I tools. Meta-analysis was performed with a random-effects model in RevMan, and certainty of evidence was evaluated using GRADE. The review was registered with PROSPERO (CRD420251071480).
resultsSix studies involving a total of 352 patients were included. In poor ovarian responders, the double trigger protocol significantly increased the number of oocytes retrieved (MD 0.49; p = 0.02) and MII oocytes (MD 0.62; p = 0.005). Among normo-responders with low oocyte maturation, the double trigger significantly improved MII oocytes (MD 5.08; p = 0.03), 2PN embryos (MD 4.70; p < 0.0001), TQEs (MD 1.46; p = 0.01), and clinical pregnancy rate (OR 5.75; p = 0.009).
conclusionThe double trigger protocol may improve certain reproductive outcomes compared to hCG-only triggering, particularly among poor ovarian responders and normo-responders with low oocyte maturation. These findings suggest that double trigger could be considered a potential personalized strategy in selected IVF populations, although further high-quality studies are needed to confirm its effectiveness. </p>.
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.