Granulocyte colony-stimulating factor for intracytoplasmic sperm injection patients with repeated implantation failure: which route is best?†

Abstract

The aim of this study was to assess whether the dual administration of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) increases the effect of only systemic administration in patients with RIF. This retrospective study included 111 infertile normoresponder cases with two or more unsuccessful in vitro fertilisation/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI) treatments, despite the transfer of good quality embryos. Patients were divided into three groups according to using G-CSF and administration route; Group 1 included patients who received subcutaneous (SC) G-CSF only (n = 38), Group 2 comprised patients who received both intrauterine (IU) and SC G-CSF (n = 39), the control group included patients who did not receive G-CSF who were matched by age (n = 34). The IU route of G-CSF was employed on ovulation triggering day. G-CSF was administered via an IU insemination catheter. SC injection was started on the day of oocyte retrieval and administered for 15 days at 100,000 IU/kg. Foetal cardiac activity (clinical pregnancy) was present in 50 patients (46.2%) after embryo transfer, with 20 patients included in SC group (Group 1) (52.6%), 25 in SC + IU group (Group 2) (64.1%) and 8 (23.5%) in control group and significant difference was observed between groups (p: .001). Pregnancy resulted in live birth in 43 patients (39.8%), with 13 patients belonging in Group 1 (34.2%), 25 in Group 2 (61.5%) and 8 (23.5%) in control group; significant differences were observed between groups (p: .001). In conclusion, our results showed that dual administration of G-CSF was significantly more effective that the SC only method.

Impact statement

• What is already known on this subject? A number of studies reported the possible benefits of granulocyte colony-stimulating factor (G-CSF) administration in recurrent implantation failure (RIF) and recurrent pregnancy loss patients; however, it is unclear which administration route is better.

• What do the results of this study add? Our results showed that G-CSF is a promising and safe agent for increasing live birth rates in patients with RIF. Additionally, dual administration is considered the better method than SC only administration.

• What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? Clinicians should consider a combination of IU use before ovulation triggering with SC administration starting from the day of oocyte collection for using G-CSF for the treatment of recurrent implantation failure. Additionally, our data show the need for research in the field of administration route of G-CSF for RIF. We suggest that further studies be performed in this field.

Keywords:

• IVF
• implantation
• recurrent implantation failure
• G-CSF

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.