ArticleBMC pregnancy and childbirth2026
Evaluating progestin-primed and GnRH antagonist ovarian stimulation protocols in PGT-A cycles: implications for clinical practice.
Article in BMC pregnancy and childbirth, 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
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundProgestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) has emerged as an alternative to GnRH-antagonist protocols in IVF, yet its impact on embryo chromosomal competence remains controversial. Evidence is particularly limited regarding whether PPOS influences blastocyst euploidy rates and key clinical outcomes in PGT-A cycles, and whether these effects vary according to maternal age and ovarian reserve status.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study included 1,843 PGT-A cycles (666 PPOS, 1,177 GnRH antagonist) performed at a single tertiary IVF center between January 2016 and January 2024. Controlled ovarian stimulation was performed with either oral medroxyprogesterone acetate or daily cetrorelix, followed by vitrification of all biopsied blastocysts and subsequent frozen embryo transfer. Primary outcomes were blastocyst euploidy and clinical pregnancy rates. Secondary outcomes included embryological parameters, miscarriage, live birth, and cumulative pregnancy rates. Subgroup analyses were performed according to maternal age and ovarian reserve.
resultsThe mean age was 37.64±4.48 years in the PPOS group and 37.80±3.49 years in the GnRH-antagonist group; age and other baseline characteristics were comparable between groups. PPOS cycles had a shorter stimulation duration (median 8 vs. 9 days, p = 0.001), with comparable gonadotropin requirements and embryological outcomes. Euploidy (32.6% vs. 32.1%, p = 0.653), mosaicism, and aneuploidy rates did not differ significantly. Clinical pregnancy, live birth, and cumulative pregnancy rates were equivalent.
conclusionPPOS and GnRH antagonist protocols yield comparable embryological and clinical outcomes in PGT-A cycles, including in advanced maternal age and diminished ovarian reserve subgroups. With its shorter stimulation duration and cost-effectiveness, PPOS is a valid alternative when fresh transfer is not planned.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.