Agonist Versus Classical HCG Trigger (Poor Responders, Normoresponders and High Responders)

Overview

Agonist triggering in controlled ovarian stimulation protocols is being used during last years (among high responder patients to avoid OHSS). Indeed, agonist triggering is more physiologic than HCG triggering. Investigators propose to compare the effectiveness of both types of trigger among three different subsets of patients: 1. Poor responders. 2. Normo-responders 3. High responders Comparing both the number and the quality of achieved oocytes.

During the last years, ovulation triggering in controlled ovarian stimulation protocols has been used specially to avoid hyperstimulation syndromes (OHSS). Indeed, the substitution of the classical HCG triggering by the agonist one, reduces almost to zero the risk of OHSS. On the other hand poor responder patients to ovarian stimulation represent a challenge in assisted reproduction. Defining poor responders is not easy, but we can define them as those patients with less than 4 eggs obtained after oocyte retrieval. Different strategies have been proposed to overcome this problem. In other words, to obtain more oocytes. These include an increase in FSH doses, an increase in FSH action by adding sensitizers agents. Among the possible strategies, investigators propose the agonist triggering. HCG (classical) triggering represents the use of a LH-like product (with a prolonged action). The administration of a GnRH agonist provoke the production and liberation of both FSH and LH. Thus, the pro-ovulatory action is more physiologic , and possibly, more effective. So, the use of a triggering protocol that nowadays is being used among high responders (thus reducing the OHSS risk) is proposed for both poor responder and normo-responder patients trying to achieve more oocytes, and specifically more mature oocytes.