Skip to content

Study · Randomized controlled trial · n = 287 · 2022

2 results

GnRH agonist supplementation in hormone replacement therapy-frozen embryo transfer cycles: a randomized controlled trial.

Alsbjerg B, Kesmodel US, Elbaek HO, Laursen R, Laursen SB, Andreasen D, Povlsen BB, Humaidan P

Reproductive biomedicine online31 Oct 2021Cited by 8 (Europe PMC)

Summary

The text of this summary is not shown here, because the article license does not allow reuse. Read it at the source (opens in a new tab)

Text rights: Publisher copyright. Results still quote short attributed sentences.

Results from this study2

2 results from studies that gave the peptide. 2 results from people.

  1. 01HumanRandomized controlled trialEfficacy outcome

    In HRT-FET cycles, triptorelin supplementation did not significantly change total pregnancy loss versus standard protocol alone (21% versus 33%).

    In plain wordsIn HRT-FET cycles, total pregnancy loss did not differ significantly with triptorelin supplementation versus standard protocol alone.

    Outcome
    No significant changeTotal pregnancy loss
    Study

    n = 287

    Comparator
    Standard HRT-FET protocol alone
    Outcome group
    Sex hormones and fertility · Reproductive and sexual health
    Studied dose
    Two boluses of 0.1 mgAs given in this study (human).

    Measurements

    Total pregnancy loss
    21%
    triptorelin group
    Total pregnancy loss
    33%
    control group
    RR
    0.63 unitless
    versus control

    Source sentences

    Summary
    The intention-to-treat analysis showed no significant difference in total pregnancy loss between the GnRHa group and the control group (21% versus 33%; relative risk [RR] 0.63, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.35-1.11)
    3 context sentences
    Summary · context
    Randomized controlled trial including a total of 287 HRT-FET cycles performed between 2013 and 2019.
    Summary · context
    After randomization participants allocated to the GnRHa group (n = 144) underwent a standard HRT protocol, supplemented with a total of two boluses of triptorelin 0.1 mg; one bolus 2 days before starting vaginal progesterone and one bolus on the 7th day of progesterone.
    Summary · context
    The control group (n = 143) underwent a standard HRT-FET protocol only.
  2. 02HumanRandomized controlled trialEfficacy outcome

    In HRT-FET cycles with positive HCG, biochemical pregnancy loss did not significantly differ with triptorelin versus control (12% versus 25%).

    In plain wordsIn HRT-FET cycles with positive pregnancy tests, biochemical pregnancy loss did not differ significantly with triptorelin versus standard protocol alone.

    Outcome
    No significant changeBiochemical pregnancy loss per positive HCG
    Study

    n = 139

    Comparator
    Standard HRT-FET protocol alone
    Outcome group
    Sex hormones and fertility · Reproductive and sexual health
    Studied dose
    Two boluses of 0.1 mgAs given in this study (human).

    Measurements

    Biochemical pregnancy loss
    12%
    triptorelin group
    Biochemical pregnancy loss
    25%
    control group
    RR
    0.48 unitless
    versus control

    Source sentences

    Summary
    nor was the biochemical pregnancy loss per positive human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG) significantly lower in the GnRHa group (12%, 8/67) compared with the control group (25%, 18/72) (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.22-1.02).
    3 context sentences
    Summary · context
    Randomized controlled trial including a total of 287 HRT-FET cycles performed between 2013 and 2019.
    Summary · context
    After randomization participants allocated to the GnRHa group (n = 144) underwent a standard HRT protocol, supplemented with a total of two boluses of triptorelin 0.1 mg; one bolus 2 days before starting vaginal progesterone and one bolus on the 7th day of progesterone.
    Summary · context
    The control group (n = 143) underwent a standard HRT-FET protocol only.

AI wrote and checked these results. AI can make mistakes, so check important results against the source.

Version history

PepBank keeps every version of the data on this study. Status changes from Retraction Watch, Europe PMC and Crossref are listed with their source.

  1. Version 2Current

    22 Oct 2026, 02:26 UTC

    Study results updated

  2. Version 1

    21 Oct 2026, 18:59 UTC

    First added · source update from Europe PMC

Subjects

Terms as the source lists them.

PepBank is a research reference. Talk to a doctor before you use any peptide.