Adding short-duration gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist and gonadotropin to natural cycle frozen embryo transfer allowed scheduling of transfer day without compromising live birth.

Borazjani A, Ali Borazjani, Kerry S.J. Flannagan, Flannagan KSJ, O'Brien JE, Jeanne E. O’Brien, Romanski PA, Phillip A. Romanski, Micah Hill, Hill M, Devine K, Kate Devine
Fertility and sterility · 2025 · doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2025.01.022 · PMID:39889922 · PMC12170174
OA: closed
📄 Open PDF View on PubMed View at publisher

Abstract

ObjectiveTo determine whether there is an association between the type of natural cycle frozen embryo transfer (FET) (scheduled vs. traditional) and live birth outcomes.DesignRetrospective cohort of all natural cycle FETs across a single network of fertility clinics in the United States.SubjectsAll natural cycle FETs performed in ovulatory patients between January 2019 and April 2022.ExposureScheduled natural cycle FET cycles that received a short-duration of gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist (1 ampule/d) with low-dose gonadotropins (75 IU/d) to delay ovulation to enable more flexible scheduling of the FET were compared with cycles without delay.Main outcome measuresLive birth.ResultsThere were a total of 1,087 natural cycle FETs that met the inclusion criteria. The scheduled natural cycle FET protocol was used in 114 (10.5%) of these cycles. The mean age was 35 (interquartile range, 33-38) years. Preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy was used in 76.3% (n = 87) of scheduled natural cycle FET cycles and 68.9% (n = 670) of natural cycle FET cycles. The scheduled natural cycle FET group had a significantly higher estradiol level (318 vs. 249 pg/mL) and a lower luteinizing hormone level (5.7 vs. 13.4 mIU/mL) at ovulatory trigger but a comparable peak endometrial thickness (9.4 vs. 9.7 mm) compared with the natural cycle FET group. Overall, there was a significant increase in the rates of positive human chorionic gonadotropin (scheduled natural cycle, 81.6%, vs. natural cycle, 64.3%; relative risk [RR], 1.26 [95% confidence interval {CI}, 1.15-1.38]) and clinical pregnancy (scheduled natural cycle, 68.4%, vs. natural cycle, 57.1%; RR, 1.21 [95% CI, 1.06-1.38]) in the scheduled natural cycle group. There were a higher proportion of live births in the scheduled natural cycle group; however, this did not reach statistical significance (scheduled natural cycle, 57.0%, vs. natural cycle, 49.4%; RR, 1.15 [95% CI, 0.97-1.36]). A subanalysis of preimplantation genetic testing for aneuploidy cycles yielded similar results.ConclusionA scheduled natural cycle FET protocol using a short duration of gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist along with low-dose gonadotropin add-back did not reduce live birth compared with traditional natural cycle FET cycles. These results suggest that this is an alternative FET protocol that may serve as a viable strategy to provide flexibility in scheduling the day of FET while still allowing a patient to undergo a natural cycle protocol. This protocol modification may enable more clinics to offer natural cycle FET.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Funding

funders
[{'doi': '10.13039/100007911', 'name': 'University of California, San Diego', 'awards': []}, {'doi': '10.13039/100002603', 'name': 'American Society for Reproductive Medicine', 'awards': []}]

Citation neighborhood (sparse)

Too few in-corpus citations on either side for a chart; here are the lists.

Cites (3)

References (23)

Source provenance

crossref
last seen: 2026-08-31T06:24:57.295462+00:00
europepmc
last seen: 2026-08-30T09:23:35.175841+00:00
unpaywall
last seen: 2026-09-01T06:29:04.589233+00:00