Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2013 Jan 31;2013(1):CD002808.
doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD002808.pub3.

Depot versus daily administration of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist protocols for pituitary down regulation in assisted reproduction cycles

Luiz Eduardo T Albuquerque  1 , Leopoldo O Tso, Humberto Saconato, Maria Cecília R M Albuquerque, Cristiane R Macedo
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Depot versus daily administration of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist protocols for pituitary down regulation in assisted reproduction cycles

Luiz Eduardo T Albuquerque et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. .

Abstract

Background: Gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist (GnRHa) is commonly used to switch off (down regulate) the pituitary gland and thus suppress ovarian activity in women undergoing in vitro fertilisation (IVF). Other fertility drugs (gonadotrophins) are then used to stimulate ovulation in a controlled manner. Among the various types of pituitary down regulation protocols in use, the long protocol achieves the best clinical pregnancy rate. The long protocol requires GnRHa administration until suppression of ovarian activity occurs, within approximately 14 days. GnRHa can be used either as daily low-dose injections or through a single injection containing higher doses of the drug (depot). It is unclear which of these two forms of administration is best, and whether single depot administration may require higher doses of gonadotrophins.

Objectives: To compare the effectiveness and safety of a single depot dose of GHRHa versus daily GnRHa doses in women undergoing IVF.

Search methods: We searched the following databases: Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group Trials Register (searched July 2012), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2012, Issue 7), MEDLINE (1966 to July 2012), EMBASE (1980 to July 2012) and LILACS (1982 to July 2012). We also screened the reference lists of articles.

Selection criteria: We included RCTs comparing depot and daily administration of GnRHa for long protocols in IVF treatment cycles in couples with any cause of infertility, using various methods of ovarian stimulation. The primary review outcomes were live birth or ongoing pregnancy, clinical pregnancy and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). Other outcomes included number of oocytes retrieved, miscarriage, multiple pregnancy, number of gonadotrophin (FSH) units used for ovarian stimulation, duration of gonadotrophin treatment, cost and patient convenience.

Data collection and analysis: Two review authors independently selected studies, extracted data and assessed study quality. For dichotomous outcomes, we calculated odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) per woman randomised. Where appropriate, we pooled studies.

Main results: Sixteen studies were eligible for inclusion (n = 1811 participants), 12 (n = 1366 participants) of which were suitable for meta-analysis. No significant heterogeneity was detected.There were no significant differences between depot GnRHa and daily GnRHa in live birth/ongoing pregnancy rates (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.31, seven studies, 873 women), but substantial differences could not be ruled out. Thus for a woman with a 24% chance of achieving a live birth or ongoing pregnancy using daily GnRHa injections, the corresponding chance using GnRHa depot would be between 18% and 29%.There was no significant difference between the groups in clinical pregnancy rate (OR 0.96, 95% CI 0.75 to 1.23, 11 studies, 1259 women). For a woman with a 30% chance of achieving clinical pregnancy using daily GnRHa injections, the corresponding chance using GnRHa depot would be between 25% and 35%.There was no significant difference between the groups in the rate of severe OHSS (OR 0.84, 95% CI 0.29 to 2.42, five studies, 570 women), but substantial differences could not be ruled out. For a woman with a 3% chance of severe OHSS using daily GnRHa injections, the corresponding risk using GnRHa depot would be between 1% and 6%.Compared to women using daily GnRHa, those on depot administration required significantly more gonadotrophin units for ovarian stimulation (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.26, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.43, 11 studies, 1143 women) and a significantly longer duration of gonadotrophin use (mean difference (MD) 0.65, 95% CI 0.46 to 0.84, 10 studies, 1033 women).Study quality was unclear due to poor reporting. Only four studies reported live births as an outcome and only five described adequate methods for concealment of allocation.

Authors' conclusions: We found no evidence of a significant difference between depot and daily GnRHa use for pituitary down regulation in IVF cycles using the long protocol, but substantial differences could not be ruled out. Since depot GnRHa requires more gonadotrophins and a longer duration of use, it may increase the overall costs of IVF treatment.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

None known.

Figures

1
1
Study flow diagram.
2
2
'Risk of bias' summary: review authors' judgements about each methodological quality item for each included study.
3
3
'Risk of bias' graph: review authors' judgements about each risk of bias item presented as percentages across all included studies.
4
4
Forest plot of comparison: 1 GnRHa depot versus GnRHa daily injection, outcome: 1.1 Live birth/ongoing pregnancy rate per woman.
5
5
Forest plot of comparison: 1 GnRHa depot versus GnRHa daily injection, outcome: 1.2 Clinical pregnancy rate per woman.
6
6
Forest plot of comparison: 1 GnRHa depot versus GnRHa daily injection, outcome: 1.3 OHSS incidence rates.
7
7
Forest plot of comparison: 1 GnRHa depot versus GnRHa daily injection, outcome: 1.5 Miscarriage rates.
8
8
Funnel plot of comparison: 1 GnRHa depot versus GnRHa daily injection, outcome: 1.2 Clinical pregnancy rate per woman.
1.1
1.1. Analysis
Comparison 1 GnRHa depot versus GnRHa daily injection, Outcome 1 Live birth/ongoing pregnancy rate per woman.
1.2
1.2. Analysis
Comparison 1 GnRHa depot versus GnRHa daily injection, Outcome 2 Clinical pregnancy rate per woman.
1.3
1.3. Analysis
Comparison 1 GnRHa depot versus GnRHa daily injection, Outcome 3 OHSS incidence rates.
1.4
1.4. Analysis
Comparison 1 GnRHa depot versus GnRHa daily injection, Outcome 4 Number of oocytes retrieved.
1.5
1.5. Analysis
Comparison 1 GnRHa depot versus GnRHa daily injection, Outcome 5 Miscarriage rates.
1.6
1.6. Analysis
Comparison 1 GnRHa depot versus GnRHa daily injection, Outcome 6 Multiple pregnancy rates.
1.7
1.7. Analysis
Comparison 1 GnRHa depot versus GnRHa daily injection, Outcome 7 Number of gonadotropin (FSH) units employed (stratified by agonist).
1.8
1.8. Analysis
Comparison 1 GnRHa depot versus GnRHa daily injection, Outcome 8 Number of gonadotrophin (FSH) units employed (stratified by full/half dose).
1.9
1.9. Analysis
Comparison 1 GnRHa depot versus GnRHa daily injection, Outcome 9 Number of days of gonadotrophin treatment (stratified by agonist).
1.10
1.10. Analysis
Comparison 1 GnRHa depot versus GnRHa daily injection, Outcome 10 Number of days of gonadotrophin treatment (stratified by full/half dose).
2.1
2.1. Analysis
Comparison 2 GnRHa depot versus GnRHa daily injection: Subgroup analysis: clinical pregnancy rate by co‐intervention, Outcome 1 Clinical pregnancy rate per woman with FSH hp.
2.2
2.2. Analysis
Comparison 2 GnRHa depot versus GnRHa daily injection: Subgroup analysis: clinical pregnancy rate by co‐intervention, Outcome 2 Clinical pregnancy rate per woman with HMG.
2.3
2.3. Analysis
Comparison 2 GnRHa depot versus GnRHa daily injection: Subgroup analysis: clinical pregnancy rate by co‐intervention, Outcome 3 Clinical pregnancy rate per woman with HMG + FSH hp.
2.4
2.4. Analysis
Comparison 2 GnRHa depot versus GnRHa daily injection: Subgroup analysis: clinical pregnancy rate by co‐intervention, Outcome 4 Clinical pregnancy rate per woman with rFSH.
3.1
3.1. Analysis
Comparison 3 GnRHa depot versus GnRHa daily injection: Sensitivity analysis: live birth/ongoing pregnancy rate and clinical pregnancy rate in studies with adequate allocation concealment, Outcome 1 Live birth/ongoing pregnancy rate per woman.
3.2
3.2. Analysis
Comparison 3 GnRHa depot versus GnRHa daily injection: Sensitivity analysis: live birth/ongoing pregnancy rate and clinical pregnancy rate in studies with adequate allocation concealment, Outcome 2 Clinical pregnancy rate per woman.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Update of

References

References to studies included in this review

Dada 1999 {published data only}
    1. Dada T, Salha O, Baillie HS, Sharma V. A comparison of three gonadotrophin‐releasing hormone analogues in an in‐vitro fertilization programme: a prospective randomized study. Human Reproduction 1999;14(2):288‐93. - PubMed
Dal Prato 2001 {published data only}
    1. Dal Prato L, Borini A, Trevisi MR, Bonu MA, Sereni E, Flamigni C. Effect of reduced dose of triptorelin at the start of ovarian stimulation on the outcome of IVF: a randomized study. Human Reproduction 2001;16(7):1409‐14. - PubMed
Devreker 1996 {published data only}
    1. Devreker F, Bergh M, Govaerts I, Gervy C, Bertrand E, Englert Y. The long‐acting gonadotropin‐releasing hormone analogues impaired the implantation rate. Fertility & Sterility 1996;65(1):122‐6. - PubMed
Dor 2000 {published data only}
    1. Dor J, Bider D, Shulman A, Levron J, Shine S, Mashiach S, et al. Effects of gonadotrophin‐releasing hormone agonists on human ovarian steroid secretion in vivo and in vitro ‐ results of a prospective, randomized in‐vitro fertilization study. Human Reproduction 2000;15(6):1225‐30. - PubMed
Ferrari 2004 {published data only}
    1. Ferrari B, Baruzi L, Lanna M, Coppola F. Ovarian Response and pregnancy outcome related to midfollicular LH levels en down‐regulated women undergoing assisted reproduction. Journal of Reproductive Medicine 2004;49:148‐52. - PubMed
Gianaroli 1994 {published data only}
    1. Gianaroli L, Ferraretti AP, Feliciani E, Tabanelli C, Magli C, Fortini D. Prospective randomized study of D‐Trp6‐LHRH versus buserelin in long desensitization protocols for medically assisted conception cycles. Human Reproduction 1994;9(2):220‐5. - PubMed
Harrison 1994 {published data only}
    1. Harrison RF, Kondaveeti U, Barry‐Kinsella C, Gordon A, Drudy L, Cottell E, et al. Should gonadotropin‐releasing hormone down‐regulation therapy be routine in in vitro fertilization?. Fertility & Sterility 1994;62(3):568‐73. - PubMed
Hsieh 2008 {published data only}
    1. Hsieh YY, Chang CC, Tsai HD. Comparisons of different dosages of gonadotropin‐releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist, short‐acting form and single, half‐dose, long‐acting form of GnRH agonist during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation and in vitro fertilization. Taiwanese Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology 2008;47(1):66‐74. - PubMed
Isikoglu 2007 {published data only}
    1. Isikoglu M, Ozdem S, Berkkanoglu M, Jamal H, Senturk Z, Ozgur K. Single‐dose depot leuprolide is as efficient as daily short‐acting leuprolide in ICSI cycles. Human Reproduction 2007;22(6):1657‐61. - PubMed
Librati 1996 {published data only}
    1. Librati C, Hocke C, Filet JP, Papaxanthos A, Mene D, Dulucq MC, et al. Can the galenic form of GnRH agonist used during long IVF protocol vary the pregnancy rate? [Le type d'analogue de la GnRH utilisé au cours des protocoles longs en FIV peut‐il influencer les taux de grossesse?]. Contraception, Fertilité, Sexualité 1996;24(10):762‐6. - PubMed
Porcu 1994 {published data only}
    1. Porcu E, Fabbri R, Dal Prato L, Longhi M, Seracchioli R, Flamigni C. Comparison between depot and standard release triptoreline in in vitro fertilization: pituitary sensitivity, luteal function, pregnancy outcome, and perinatal results. Fertility & Sterility 1994;62(1):126‐32. - PubMed
Porcu 1995 {published data only}
    1. Porcu E, Filicori M, Dal Prato L, Fabbri R, Seracchioli R, Colombi C, et al. Comparison between depot leuprorelin and daily buserelin in IVF. Journal of Assisted Reproduction Genetics 1995;12(1):15‐9. - PubMed
Safdarian 2007 {published data only}
    1. Safdarian L, Mohammadi FS, Alleyassin A, Aghahosseini M, Meysamie A, Rahimi E. Clinical outcome with half‐dose depot triptorelin is the same as reduced‐dose daily buserelin in a long protocol of controlled ovarian stimulation for ICSI/embryo transfer: a randomized double‐blind clinical trial (NCT00461916). Human Reproduction 2007;22(9):2449‐54. - PubMed
Tapanainen 1993 {published data only}
    1. Tapanainen J, Hovatta O, Juntunen K, Martikaineu H, Ratsula K, Tulppala M, et al. Subcutaneous goserelin versus intranasal buserelin for pituitary down‐regulation in patients undergoing IVF: a randomized comparative study. Human Reproduction 1993;8(12):2052‐5. - PubMed
    1. Tapanainen JS, Hovatta O. Pituitary down‐regulation with goserelin (Zoladex) for in vitro fertilisation. British Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology 1994;101(10):27‐8. - PubMed
Tehraninejad 2010 {published data only}
    1. Tehraninejad ESh, Nekoo EA, Ezabadi Z, Rashidi BH, Amirchaghmaghi E. Half‐dose, long‐acting gonadotropin‐releasing hormone agonist (Diphereline) is comparable with daily injections of short‐acting gonadotropin‐releasing hormone agonist (Suprefact) in IVF/ICSI cycles. Archives of Medical Sciences 2010;6(6):2909‐12. - PMC - PubMed
Tsai 1995 {published data only}
    1. Tsai HD, Chen CM, Lo HY, Chang CC. Subcutaneous low dose leuprolide acetate depot versus leuprolide acetate for women undergoing ovarian stimulation for in‐vitro fertilization. Human Reproduction 1995;10(11):2909‐12. - PubMed

References to studies excluded from this review

Devroey 1994 {published data only}
    1. Devroey P, Mannaerts B, Smitz J, Coelingh Bennink H, Steirteghem A. Clinical outcome of a pilot efficacy study on recombinant human follicle‐stimulating hormone (Org 32489) combined with various gonadotrophin‐releasing hormone agonist regimens. Human Reproduction 1994;9(6):1064‐9. - PubMed
Dicker 1991 {published data only}
    1. Dicker D, Goldman GA, Ashkenazi J, Feldberg D, Shelef M, Goldman JA. Combination of long and short term GnRH analogue protocols: a new therapeutic approach to persistent high progesterone levels in IVF cycles. Human Reproduction 1991;6(2):203‐5. - PubMed
Fábregues 1998 {published data only}
    1. Fábregues F, Balasch J, Creus M, Cívico S, Carmona F, Puerto B, et al. Long‐term down‐regulation does not improve pregnancy rates in an in vitro fertilization program. Fertility & Sterility 1998;70(1):46‐51. - PubMed
Geber 2002 {published data only}
    1. Geber S, Sales L, Sampaio MA. Comparison between a single dose of goserelin (depot) and multiple daily doses of leuprolide acetate for pituitary suppression in IVF treatment: a clinical endocrinological study of the ovarian response. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 2002;19(7):313‐8. [MEDLINE: ] - PMC - PubMed
Gonen 1991 {published data only}
    1. Gonen Y, Dirnfeld M, Goldman S, Koifman M, Abramovici H. The use of long‐acting gonadotropin‐releasing hormone agonist (GnRH‐a; Decapeptyl) and gonadotropins versus short‐acting GnRH‐a (buserelin) and gonadotropins before and during ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization (IVF). Journal of In Vitro Fertilization & Embryo Transfer 1991;8(5):254‐9. - PubMed
Hazout 1993 {published data only}
    1. Hazout A, Ziegler D, Cornel C, Fernandez H, Lelaidier C, Frydman R. Comparison of short 7‐day and prolonged treatment with gonadotropin‐releasing hormone agonist desensitization for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation. Fertility & Sterility 1993;59(3):596‐600. - PubMed
Insler 1991 {published data only}
    1. Isler V, Lunenfeld E, Potashnik G, Levy J. Ovarian stimulation concomitant with pituitary‐ovarian axis suppression by different GnRH agonist. International Journal of Fertility 1991;36(2):121‐7. - PubMed
Lipitz 1989 {published data only}
    1. Lipitz S, Ben‐Rafael Z, Dor J, Shalev J, Elenbogen A, Levran D, et al. Suppression with gonadotropin‐releasing hormone analogues prior to stimulation with gonadotropins: comparison of three protocols. Gynecologic & Obstetric Investigation 1989;28:31‐4. - PubMed
Lopes 1986 {published data only}
    1. Lopes A, Barriere P, Charbonnel B, Paillard B. Value of short‐term use of a gonadorelin analog in an in vitro fertilization program [Intérêt de l'utilisation brève d'un analogue de la gonadoreline dans un programme de fécondation in vitro]. Presse Medicale 1986;15(41):2074. - PubMed
Lorusso 2004 {published data only}
    1. Lorusso F, Depalo R, Selvaggi L. Relationship between gonadotropin releasing hormone agonist dosage and in vitro fertilization outcome. Gynecological Endocrinolology 2004;18:69‐73. - PubMed
Meldrum 2006 {published data only}
    1. Meldrum DR. Patient preparation and standard stimulation regimens using gonadotropin‐releasing hormone agonists. Clinical Obstetrics and Gynecology 2006;49(1):4‐11. - PubMed
Oyesanya 1995 {published data only}
    1. Oyesanya OA, Teo SK, Quah E, Abdurazak N, Lee FY, Cheng WC. Pituitary down‐regulation prior to in‐vitro fertilization and embryo transfer: a comparison between a single dose of Zoladex depot and multiple daily doses of Suprefact. Human Reproduction 1995;10(5):1042‐4. [MEDLINE: ; 95386617] - PubMed
Parinaud 1992 {published data only}
    1. Parinaud J, Oustry P, Perineau M, Rène JM, Monroziès X, Pontonnier G. Randomized trial of three luteinizing hormone‐releasing hormone analogues used for ovarian stimulation in an in vitro fertilization program. Fertility & Sterility 1992;57(6):1265‐8. - PubMed
Ron‐El 1992 {published data only}
    1. Ron‐El R, Herman A, Golan A, Soffer Y, Nachum H, Caspi E. Ultrashort gonadotropin‐releasing hormone agonist (GnRH‐a) protocol in comparison with the long‐acting GnRH‐a protocol and menotropin alone. Fertility & Sterility 1992;58(6):1164‐8. - PubMed
Schmutzler 1988 {published data only}
    1. Schmutzler RK, Reichert C, Diedrich K, Wildt L, Diedrich CH, Al‐Hasani S, et al. Comparison of a long acting and a short acting GnRH analogue/gonadotropin stimulation for in‐vitro fertilization under various indications [Vergleich eines langwirksamen und kurzwirksamen GnRH‐Analogs in Kombination mit Gonadotropinen zur In‐vitro‐Fertilisierung unter verschiedenen Indikationsstellungen [German]]. Geburtsh u Frauenheilk 1988;49:85‐90. - PubMed
    1. Schmutzler RK, Reichert C, Diedrich K, Wildt L, Diedrich Ch, Al‐Hasani S, et al. Combined GnRH‐agonis/gonadotrophin stimulation for in‐vitro fertilization. Human Reproduction 1988;3(2):29‐33. - PubMed
Sonntag 2005 {published data only}
    1. Sonntag B, Kiesel L, Nieschlag E, Behre HM. Differences in serum LH and FSH levels using depot or daily GnRH agonists in controlled ovarian stimulation: influence on ovarian response and outcome of ART. Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics 2005;22(7):277‐83. - PubMed
Yang 1991 {published data only}
    1. Yang YS, Ho HN, Lien YR, Hwang JL, Melinda S, Lin HR, et al. The use of a long‐acting gonadotropin‐releasing hormone analog (D‐Trp‐6‐LHRH) for improvement of ovarian stimulation in assisted conception programs. Journal of the Formosan Medical Association 1991;90:1081‐5. - PubMed

Additional references

Balash 1992
    1. Balasch J, Gomez F, Casamitjana R, Carmona F, Rivera F, Vanrell JA. Pituitary‐ovarian suppression by the standard and half‐doses of D‐Trp‐6‐luteinizing hormone‐releasing hormone depot. Human Reproduction 1992;7(9):1230‐4. - PubMed
Bussenot 1993
    1. Bussenot I, Azoulay‐Barjonet C, Parianaud J. Modulation of the steroidogenesis of cultured human granulosa‐lutein cells by gonadotropin‐releasing hormone analogs. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism 1993;76(5):1376‐9. - PubMed
Fleming 1986
    1. Fleming R, Coutts JRT. Induction of multiple follicular growth in normally menstruating women with endogenous gonadotropin suppression. Fertility & Sterility 1986;45:226. - PubMed
Gaetje 1994
    1. Gaetje R. Influence of gonadotrophin releasing hormone (GnRH) and a GNRH‐agonist on granulosa cell steroidogenesis. Clinical & Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology 1994;21(3):164‐9. - PubMed
Gerrero 1993
    1. Gerrero HE, Stein P, Asch RH, Fried EP, Tesone M. Effect of a gonadotropin‐releasing hormone agonist on luteinizing hormone receptors and steroidogenesis in ovarian cells. Fertility & Sterility 1993;59(4):803‐8. - PubMed
GRADE PRO 2011 [Computer program]
    1. GRADE Working Group. GRADE Profiler Software. GRADE Working Group, 2011.
Herman 1992
    1. Herman A, Ron‐El R, Golan A, Nachum H, Soffer Y, Caspi E. Impaired corpus luteum function and other undesired results of pregnancies associated with inadvertent administration of a long‐acting agonist of gonadotrophin‐releasing hormone. Human Reproduction 1992;7:465‐8. - PubMed
Maheshwari 2011
    1. Maheshwari A, Gibreel A, Siristatidis CS, Bhattacharya S. Gonadotrophin‐releasing hormone agonist protocols for pituitary suppression in assisted reproduction. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2011, Issue 8. [DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006919.pub3] - DOI - PubMed
Meldum 1989
    1. Meldum DR, Wisot A, Hamilton F, Gutlay AL, Kempton W, Huynh D. Routine pituitary suppression with leuprolide before ovarian stimulation for oocyte retrieval. Fertility & Sterility 1989;51:455‐9. - PubMed
Minaretzis 1995
    1. Minaretzis D, Jakubowski M, Mortola J, Pavlou SN. Gonadotropin‐releasing hormone receptor gene expression in human ovary and granulosa‐lutein cells. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism 1995;80(2):430‐4. - PubMed
Néstor 1984
    1. Néstor JJ Jr. Development of agonistic LHRH analogs. In: Vickery BH, Néstor JJ, Jr, Hafez ESE editor(s). LHRH and its analogs ‐ contraceptive and therapeutic applications. Lancaster, UK: MTP Press, 1984:3.
Parinaud 1988
    1. Parinaud J, Beaur A, Bourreau E, Vieitez G, Pontonnier G. Effect of a luteinizing hormone‐releasing hormone agonist (buserelin) on steroidogenesis of cultured human preovulatory granulosa cells. Fertility & Sterility 1988;50(4):597‐602. - PubMed
Peng 1994
    1. Peng C, Fan NC, Ligier M, Vaananen J, Leung PC. Expression and regulation of gonadotropin‐releasing hormone (GnRH) and GNRH receptor messenger ribonucleic acids in human granulosa‐luteal cells. Endocrinology 1994;135(5):1740‐6. - PubMed
Porter 1984
    1. Porter RN, Smith W, Craft IL. Induction of ovulation for in vitro fertilisation using buserelin and gonadotrophins. Lancet 1984;2:1284. - PubMed
Rabin 1980
    1. Rabin D, McNeil LW. Pituitary and gonadal desensitization after continuous luteinizing hormone‐releasing hormone infusion in normal females. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism 1980;51:873. - PubMed
RevMan 2011 [Computer program]
    1. The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration. Review Manager (RevMan). Version 5.1. Copenhagen: The Nordic Cochrane Centre, The Cochrane Collaboration, 2011.
Sanders 1984
    1. Sanders LM, Kent JS, McRae GI, Vickery BH, Tice TR, Lawis DH. Controlled release of a LH‐RH analogue from poly (d,l,lactidecoglycolide) microspheres. Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences 1984;73(9):1294‐7. - PubMed
Testart 1993
    1. Testart J, Lefevre B, Gougeon A. Effects of gonadotrophin releasing hormone agonists (GnRHa) on follicle and oocyte quality. Human Reproduction 1993;8:511‐8. - PubMed
Uemura 1994
    1. Uemura T, Namiki T, Kimura A, Yanagisawa T, Minaguchi H. Direct effects of gonadotropin‐releasing hormone on the ovary in rats and humans. Hormone Research 1994;41(Suppl 1):7‐13. - PubMed
Van Uem 1986
    1. Uem JF, Garcia JE, Liu HC, Rosenwaks Z. Clinical aspects with regard to the occurrence of an endogenous LH surge in gonadotropin induced normal menstrual cycles. Journal of In Vitro Fertilization & Embryo Transfer 1986;3:345. - PubMed
Vauthier 1989
    1. Vauthier D, Lefebvre G. The use of gonadotropin‐releasing hormone analogs for in vitro fertilization: comparison between the standard form and long‐acting formulation of D‐Trp‐6‐luteinizing hormone‐releasing hormone. Fertility & Sterility 1989;51:100‐4. - PubMed
Vickery 1987
    1. Vickery BH, Néstor JJ. Luteinizing hormone‐releasing hormone analogs: development and mechanism of action. Seminars in Reproductive Endocrinology 1987;5:353.
Wong 2001
    1. Wong JM, Forrest KA, Snabes MC, Zhao SZ, Gersh GE, Kennedy SH. Efficacy of nafarelin in assisted reproductive technology: a meta‐analysis. Human Reproduction Update 2001;7(1):92‐101. - PubMed

Publication types

Substances

LinkOut - more resources