Stimulated cycle versus artificial cycle for frozen embryo transfer in patients with polycystic ovary syndrome: a Meta-analysis

Purpose Our aim is to conduct a meta-analysis comparing clinical outcomes between the mild ovarian stimulation cycle versus an artificial cycle (AC) for frozen embryo transfer (FET) in patients with polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). Methods We systematically searched the databases of PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Library from inception to January 2020. The outcomes were live birth rate (LBR), ongoing pregnancy rate (OPR), clinical pregnancy rate (CPR), embryo implantation rate (IR) and miscarriage rate (MR). The mild ovarian stimulation cycle and AC were compared according to risk ratios and 95% confidence intervals using a fixed or random effects model. Results Four retrospective studies describing the clinical outcomes were included. We found no significant difference in LBR, OPR, CPR, IR or MR between the mild ovarian stimulation cycle and AC protocols, whereas a lower MR was found for the letrozole-stimulated cycle than the AC. Conclusions The letrozole-stimulated cycle for endometrial preparation in PCOS patients undergoing FET may lower the MR more than the AC. PCOS patients using the mild ovarian stimulation cycle for endometrial preparation undergoing FET had similar LBR, OPR, CPR and IR compared with the AC. The letrozole-stimulated protocol may be a reasonable choice for endometrial preparation before FET for women with PCOS.

Automated summary

This study compared clinical outcomes between mild ovarian stimulation cycle and artificial cycle for frozen embryo transfer in PCOS patients, finding no significant differences in most aspects, but a potential lower miscarriage rate with letrozole-stimulated cycle.