[Home ] [Archive]    
:: Main About journal Editorial Board Current Issue Archive Submit an article Site Map Contact ::
Main Menu
Home::
Journal Information::
Articles archive::
For Authors::
For Reviewers::
Registration::
Contact us::
Site Facilities::
Editorial Board::
::
Search in website

Advanced Search
..
Receive site information
Enter your Email in the following box to receive the site news and information.
..
:: Volume 10, Issue 3 (9-2021) ::
Int J Med Invest 2021, 10(3): 23-30 Back to browse issues page
Evaluation Of Various Progesterone Therapy Routes For Luteal Phase Support In IVF: A Systematic Review And Meta-Analysis
Majid Vatankhah , Arman Hakemi , Fatemeh Rahmanian , Somayeh Hoseini , Samaneh Abiri , Farideh Mogharab , Lohrasb Taheri , Rezvan Heidari , Marzieh Haghbeen *
Women’s Health and Disease Research Center, Jahrom University of Medical Sciences, Jahrom, Iran.
Abstract:   (2160 Views)
Background:
The progesterone secreted from the ovary until the seventh week of pregnancy is required to maintain pregnancy. In fertility-assisted cycles, administration of GnRH agonists, can cause Corpus luteum failure and progesterone secreted from the ovary will not be sufficient to protect pregnancy. The best way to prevent this situation is support progesterone administration.
Objective: this study aimed to rank the best route of progesterone administration in luteal phase support.
Methods:
Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of progesterone for the luteal phase support were identified from online databases of Scopus, Google Scholar, Pubmed. Treatment efficacy was defined as ongoing pregnancy.  Data were extracted and analyzed using odds ratios (ORs). A Bayesian network meta-analysis was performed using the Markov chain Monte Carlo method in WinBUGS and NetMetaXL.
Results:
Total 1176 participants were studied in 16 trials of 6 separate progesterone routes including vaginal progesterone gel, progesterone sub q, Dydrogesterone, Cap 200 mg TID, Cap 200 mg BID, and progesterone IM. Comparison test shows better likelihood of SUCRA followed by vaginal progesterone gel (77.8%), progesterone sub q (55.49%), Dydrogesterone (53.97%), Cap 200 mg TID (50.67%), Cap 200 mg BID (48.99%) and finally progesterone IM (13.06%).
Conclusion:
This study ranked as the best route of progesterone therapy for luteal phase support, through the reviewed studies.
Keywords: Network meta-analysis, Progesterone, Luteal Phase Support, IVF.
Full-Text [PDF 205 kb]   (638 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Review | Subject: General
References
1. 1. GRIESINGER, Georg, et al. Oral dydrogesterone versus intravaginal micronized progesterone gel for luteal phase support in IVF: a randomized clinical trial. Human Reproduction, 2018, 33.12: 2212-2221.‏. 2. FERRARETTI, Anna Pia, et al. No need for luteal phase support in IVF cycles after mild stimulation: proof-of-concept study. Reproductive biomedicine online, 2017, 34.2: 162-165.‏. 3. WATTERS, Marianne, et al. Short Versus Extended Progesterone Supplementation for Luteal Phase Support in fresh IVF cycles: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Reproductive BioMedicine Online, 2019.‏. 4. THOMSEN, Lise Haaber, et al. Reply: Low as well as high serum P4 levels in the early and mid-luteal phase reduce the chance of a live birth following IVF treatment with fresh embryo transfer. Human Reproduction, 2018.‏. 5. MENDOZA-TESARIK, Raquel, et al. GnRH agonist treatment of luteal phase deficiency in HCG-triggered IVF cycles: a matched case-control study. Reproductive biomedicine online, 2019, 39.2: 225-230.‏. 6. WEEDIN, Elizabeth, et al. Luteal-phase progesterone supplementation in non-IVF treatment: a survey of physicians providing infertility treatment. Human Fertility, 2019, 1-7.‏ 7. Brown S, Hutton B, Clifford T, Coyle D, Grima D, Wells G, Cameron C. A Microsoft-Excel-based tool for running and critically appraising network meta-analyses—an overview and application of NetMetaXL. Systematic reviews. 2014 Dec;3(1):1-1. 8. Geber S, Moreira AC, de Paula SO, Sampaio M. Comparison between two forms of vaginally administered progesterone for luteal phase support in assisted reproduction cycles. Reproductive biomedicine online. 2007 Jan 1;14(2):155-8. 9. Simunic V, Tomic V, Tomic J, Nizic D. Comparative study of the efficacy and tolerability of two vaginal progesterone formulations, Crinone 8% gel and Utrogestan capsules, used for luteal support. Fertility and sterility. 2007 Jan 1;87(1):83-7. 10. Kleinstein J, Luteal Phase Study Group. Efficacy and tolerability of vaginal progesterone capsules (Utrogest™ 200) compared with progesterone gel (Crinone™ 8%) for luteal phase support during assisted reproduction. Fertility and sterility. 2005 Jun 1;83(6):1641-9. 11. Tay PY, Lenton EA. The impact of luteal supplement on pregnancy outcome following stimulated IVF cycles. Medical Journal of Malaysia. 2005 Jun 1;60(2):151. 12. Ng EH, Chan CC, Tang OS, Ho PC. A randomized comparison of side effects and patient convenience between Cyclogest® suppositories and Endometrin® tablets used for luteal phase support in IVF treatment. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology. 2007 Apr 1;131(2):182-8. 13. Ludwig M, Schwartz P, Babahan B, Katalinic A, Weiss JM, Felberbaum R, Al-Hasani S, Diedrich K. Luteal phase support using either Crinone® 8% or Utrogest®: results of a prospective, randomized study. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology. 2002 Jun 10;103(1):48-52. 14. Tomic V, Tomic J, Klaic DZ, Kasum M, Kuna K. Oral dydrogesterone versus vaginal progesterone gel in the luteal phase support: randomized controlled trial. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Biology. 2015 Mar 1;186:49-53. 15. Ho CH, Chen SU, Peng FS, Chang CY, Yang YS. Luteal support for IVF/ICSI cycles with Crinone 8%(90 mg) twice daily results in higher pregnancy rates than with intramuscular progesterone. Journal of the Chinese Medical Association. 2008 Aug 1;71(8):386-91. 16. Lockwood G, Griesinger G, Cometti B, et al. Subcutaneous progesterone versus vaginal progesterone gel for luteal phase support in in vitro fertilization: a noninferiority randomized controlled study. Fertil Steril. 2014;101:112–119.e113. 17. Baker VL, Jones CA, Doody K, et al. A randomized, controlled trial comparing the efficacy and safety of aqueous subcutaneous progesterone with vaginal progesterone for luteal phase support of in vitro fertilization. Hum Reprod. 2014;29:2212–2220. 18. Zaman AY, Coskun S, Alsanie AA, Awartani KA. Intramuscular progesterone (Gestone) versus vaginal progesterone suppository (Cyclogest) for luteal phase support in cycles of in vitro fertilization–embryo transfer: patient preference and drug efficacy. Fertility research and practice. 2017 Dec;3(1):1-6. 19. Doblinger J, Cometti B, Trevisan S, Griesinger G. Subcutaneous progesterone is effective and safe for luteal phase support in IVF: an individual patient data meta-analysis of the phase III trials. PLoS One. 2016 Mar 18;11(3):e0151388. 20. Yanushpolsky E, Hurwitz S, Greenberg L, Racowsky C, Hornstein MD. Comparison of Crinone 8% intravaginal gel and intramuscular progesterone supplementation for in vitro fertilization/embryo transfer in women under age 40: interim analysis of a prospective randomized trial. Fertility and sterility. 2008 Feb 1;89(2):485-7. 21. Yanushpolsky E, Hurwitz S, Greenberg L, Racowsky C, Hornstein M. Patterns of luteal phase bleeding in in vitro fertilization cycles supplemented with Crinone vaginal gel and with intramuscular progesterone – impact of luteal estrogen: prospective, randomized study and post hoc analysis. Fertil Steril. 2011;95:617–20 22. Chi HB, Liu NN, Li R, Tao LY, Chen LX, Qiao J. Comparison of vaginal gel and intramuscular progesterone for in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer with gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol. Chinese medical journal. 2018 Jul 5;131(13):1557. 23. Berjis K, Sarem A, Moaya M, Alaiha NM. Comparison of Intramuscular and Intravaginal Progesterone for Luteal Phase Support in IVF Cycles: a randomized clinical trial. Journal of Family and Reproductive Health. 2008:99-102. 24. Nosarka S, Kruger T, Siebert I, Grové D. Luteal phase support in in vitro fertilization: meta-‎analysis of randomized trials. Gynecologic and obstetric investigation. 2005;60(2):67-74.‎ 25. Pritts EA, Atwood AK. Luteal phase support in infertility treatment: a meta-analysis of the randomized trials. Human Reproduction. 2002 Sep 1;17(9):2287-99. 26. Smitz j, D., Camusm, The luteal phase and early pregnancy aftercombined GnRH agonist. HMG treatment for superovulation in IVF of GIFT. Hum Repord. 1988 Jul ;3(s) :585¬90. 27. Watters M, Noble M, Child T, Nelson S. Short versus extended progesterone supplementation for luteal phase support in fresh IVF cycles: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Reproductive biomedicine online. 2020 Jan 1;40(1):143-50. 28. Griesinger G, Blockeel C, Kahler E, Pexman-Fieth C, Olofsson JI, Driessen S, Tournaye H. Dydrogesterone as an oral alternative to vaginal progesterone for IVF luteal phase support: A systematic review and individual participant data meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2020 Nov 4;15(11):e0241044. 29. Salehpour S, Tamimi M, Saharkhiz N. Comparison of oral dydrogesterone with suppository vaginal progesterone for luteal-phase support in in vitro fertilization (IVF): A randomized clinical trial. Iranian journal of reproductive medicine. 2013 Nov;11(11):913.c
Add your comments about this article
Your username or Email:

CAPTCHA


XML     Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Vatankhah M, Hakemi A, Rahmanian F, Hoseini S, Abiri S, Mogharab F, et al . Evaluation Of Various Progesterone Therapy Routes For Luteal Phase Support In IVF: A Systematic Review And Meta-Analysis. Int J Med Invest 2021; 10 (3) :23-30
URL: http://intjmi.com/article-1-645-en.html


Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
Volume 10, Issue 3 (9-2021) Back to browse issues page
International Journal of Medical Investigation
Persian site map - English site map - Created in 0.05 seconds with 37 queries by YEKTAWEB 4645