Crinone vaginal gel is equally effective and better tolerated than intramuscular progesterone for luteal phase support in in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer cycles: a prospective randomized study

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

Background

The requirement for luteal phase support (LPS) in stimulated IVF cycles is well established, however drug choice, and route of administration and duration of use are not. This report evaluates patients’ preference and satisfaction by using either vaginal or intramuscular (IM) progesterone (P) supplementation for luteal phase support after in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer (IVF-ET).

Methods

It is a prospective cohort study done in a reproductive and infertility unit in a tertiary care hospital from March 2013 through February 2015 for four hundred and nine patients undergoing IVF-ET. Patients were allowed to choose either vaginal or IM P for LPS. Patient preference and satisfaction, as well as differences in clinical pregnancy rates between the two groups were assessed at one or two time points throughout the study.

Results

There were no statistically significant differences in the patients’ characteristics and clinical outcomes between the two groups. There were 88 pregnancies (38.8%) among patients treated with vaginal p and 62 pregnancies (34%) among IM P patients. Average satisfaction score at the pregnancy test and ultrasound (U/S) visits was similar between both groups.

Conclusions

Patients’ satisfaction and pregnancy rates were similar between vaginal and IM P supplementation.

Vaginal progesterone vs intramuscular 17α-hydroxyprogesterone caproate for prevention of recurrent spontaneous preterm birth in singleton gestations: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVE

Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have recently compared intramuscular 17α-hydroxyprogesterone caproate (17-OHPC) with vaginal progesterone for reducing the risk of spontaneous preterm birth (SPTB) in singleton gestations with prior SPTB. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the efficacy of vaginal progesterone compared with 17-OHPC in prevention of SPTB in singleton gestations with prior SPTB.

METHODS

Searches of electronic databases were performed to identify all RCTs of asymptomatic singleton gestations with prior SPTB that were randomized to prophylactic treatment with either vaginal progesterone (intervention group) or intramuscular 17-OHPC (comparison group). No restrictions for language or geographic location were applied. The primary outcome was SPTB < 34 weeks. Secondary outcomes were SPTB < 37 weeks, < 32 weeks, < 28 weeks and < 24 weeks, maternal adverse drug reaction and neonatal outcomes. The summary measures were reported as relative risk (RR) with 95% CI. Risk of bias for each included study was assessed.

RESULTS

Three RCTs (680 women) were included. The mean gestational age at randomization was about 16 weeks. Women were given progesterone until 36 weeks or delivery. Regarding vaginal progesterone, one study used 90 mg gel daily, one used 100 mg suppository daily and one used 200 mg suppository daily. All included RCTs used 250 mg intramuscular 17-OHPC weekly in the comparison group. Women who received vaginal progesterone had significantly lower rates of SPTB < 34 weeks (17.5% vs 25.0%; RR, 0.71 (95% CI, 0.53-0.95); low quality of evidence) and < 32 weeks (8.9% vs 14.5%; RR, 0.62 (95% CI, 0.40-0.94); low quality of evidence) compared with women who received 17-OHPC. There were no significant differences in the rates of SPTB < 37 weeks, < 28 weeks and < 24 weeks. The rate of women who reported adverse drug reactions was significantly lower in the vaginal progesterone group compared with the 17-OHPC group (7.1% vs 13.2%; RR, 0.53 (95% CI, 0.31-0.91); very low quality of evidence). Regarding neonatal outcomes, vaginal progesterone was associated with a lower rate of neonatal intensive care unit admission compared with 17-OHPC (18.7% vs 23.5%; RR, 0.63 (95% CI, 0.47-0.83); low quality of evidence). For the comparison of 17-OHPC vs vaginal progesterone, the quality of evidence was downgraded for all outcomes by at least one degree due to imprecision (the optimal information size was not reached) and by at least one degree due to indirectness (different interventions).

CONCLUSIONS

Daily vaginal progesterone (either suppository or gel) started at about 16 weeks' gestation is a reasonable, if not better, alternative to weekly 17-OHPC injection for prevention of SPTB in women with singleton gestations and prior SPTB. However, the quality level of the summary estimates was low or very low as assessed by GRADE, indicating that the true effect may be, or is likely to be, substantially different from the estimate of the effect. Copyright © 2016 ISUOG. Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. COMPARACIÓN ENTRE LA PROGESTERONA VAGINAL Y EL 17Α-HIDROXIPROGESTERONA CAPROATO INTRAMUSCULAR PARA LA PREVENCIÓN DEL PARTO PRETÉRMINO ESPONTÁNEO RECURRENTE EN EMBARAZOS CON FETO ÚNICO: REVISIÓN SISTEMÁTICA Y METAANÁLISIS DE ENSAYOS CONTROLADOS ALEATORIOS: RESUMEN OBJETIVO: Recientemente se han realizado varios ensayos controlados aleatorios (ECA) que comparaban el caproato de 17α-hidroxiprogesterona (17-OHPC, por sus siglas en inglés) por vía intramuscular con la progesterona por vía vaginal para la reducción del riesgo de parto pretérmino espontáneo (PPTE) en embarazos con feto único de gestantes con historial de PPTE. El objetivo de esta revisión sistemática y metaanálisis fue evaluar la eficacia de la progesterona vaginal en comparación con la 17-OHPC en la prevención de embarazos con feto único de gestantes con historial de PPTE. MÉTODOS: Se realizaron búsquedas en bases de datos electrónicas para identificar todos los ECA con embarazos de feto único asintomáticos con historial de PPTE antes de ser asignados al azar a un tratamiento profiláctico, ya fuera con progesterona vaginal (grupo de intervención) o con 17-OHPC intramuscular (grupo de control). No se aplicaron restricciones respecto al idioma o la ubicación geográfica. El resultado primario fue PPTE < 34 semanas. Los resultados secundarios fueron PPTE <37 semanas, < 32 semanas, < 28 semanas y < 24 semanas, la reacción materna adversa al fármaco y los resultados neonatales. Las medidas del resumen se reportaron como riesgo relativo (RR) con IC del 95%. Para cada estudio incluido se evaluó el riesgo de sesgo.

RESULTADOS

Se incluyeron tres ECA (680 mujeres). La media de la edad gestacional en el momento de la aleatorización fue de 16 semanas. A las mujeres se les administró progesterona hasta la semana 36 o hasta el parto. Con respecto a la progesterona vaginal, un estudio utilizó gel de 90 mg diariamente, otro utilizó un supositorio diario de 100 mg y el otro utilizó un supositorio diario de 200 mg. Todos los ECA incluidos en el grupo de comparación utilizaron 250 mg semanales de 17-OHPC por vía intramuscular. Las mujeres que recibieron progesterona vaginal tuvieron tasas significativamente más bajas de PPTE < 34 semanas (17,5% vs. 25,0%; RR 0,71 (IC 95%, 0,53-0,95); calidad de la evidencia baja) y < 32 semanas (8,9% vs. 14,5%; RR 0,62 (IC 95%, 0,40-0,94); calidad de evidencia baja), en comparación con las mujeres que recibieron 17-OHPC. No hubo diferencias significativas en las tasas de PPTE < 37 semanas, < 28 semanas y < 24 semanas. La tasa de mujeres que reportaron reacciones adversas a los medicamentos fue significativamente menor en el grupo de progesterona vaginal en comparación con el grupo de 17-OHPC (7,1% vs. 13,2%; RR 0,53 (IC 95%, 0,31-0,91); calidad de la evidencia muy baja). En cuanto a los resultados neonatales, la progesterona vaginal se asoció a una menor tasa de admisiones en la unidad neonatal de cuidados intensivos en comparación con la 17-OHPC (18,7% vs. 23,5%; RR 0,63 (IC 95%, 0,47-0,83); calidad de evidencia baja). Para la comparación del 17-OHPC con la progesterona vaginal se rebajó la calidad de las pruebas para todos los resultados en al menos un grado debido a imprecisiones (no se alcanzó el tamaño óptimo de la información) y en al menos un grado debido al carácter indirecto de los estudios (diferentes intervenciones).

CONCLUSIONES

La progesterona vaginal administrada diariamente (ya fuera como supositorio o como gel) desde la semana 16 de gestación es una alternativa razonable, si no mejor, a una inyección semanal de 17-OHPC para la prevención de PPTE en mujeres con embarazos de feto único e historial de PPTE. Sin embargo, el nivel de calidad de las estimaciones del resumen fue bajo o muy bajo según lo evaluado por GRADE, lo que indica que el verdadero efecto puede ser, o es probable que sea, sustancialmente diferente de la estimación del efecto. 17Α-:META: : (randomized controlled trials,RCTs)(spontaneous preterm birth,SPTB)17α-(intramuscular 17α-hydroxyprogesterone caproate,17-OHPC)SPTB。metaSPTB17-OHPCSPTB。 : ,SPTBRCTs,RCTs()17-OHPC()。。34SPTB。37、32、2824SPTB,。(relative risk,RR)95%CI。。 : 3RCTs(680)。16。,36。,90 mg,100 mg,200 mg。,RCTs250 mg 17-OHPC。17-OHPC,34 [17.5%25.0%;RR,0.71(95% CI,0.53 ~ 0.95);]32[8.9%14.5%;RR,0.62(95% CI,0.40 ~ 0.94);]SPTB。37、2824SPTB。17-OHPC,[7.1%13.2%;RR,0.53(95% CI,0.31 ~ 0.91);]。,17-OHPC,[18.7%23.5%;RR,0.63(95% CI,0.47 ~ 0.83);]。17-OHPC,(),()。 : SPTBSPTB,16()17-OHPC,。,GRADE,,。.

Phase III trial of 8% vaginal progesterone gel for luteal phase support in Japanese women undergoing in vitro fertilization and fresh embryo transfer cycles

Aim

This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of vaginal progesterone gel that was administered daily for luteal phase support as part of in vitro fertilization/embryo transfer (IVF/ET) cycles in Japanese women.

Methods

This was a phase III, multicenter, open-label, single-arm trial in Japanese women undergoing IVF/ET, using the Japanese Society of Obstetrics and Gynecology 2009 registry as a historical control. The primary objective was to demonstrate the non-inferiority, with regard to the clinical pregnancy rate per ET, of vaginal progesterone gel that was administered once daily, compared with the historical standard value in IVF/ET cycles in Japan. The biochemical pregnancy (positive serum β-hCG pregnancy test but no clinical pregnancy) rate per ET also was investigated, as were the safety and tolerability of the vaginal progesterone gel.

Results

Of the 178 women who were enrolled, 123 underwent IVF/ET. The clinical pregnancy rate per ET was non-inferior in the prospective arm, compared with the historical population. The biochemical pregnancy rate per ET was 7.3%. The safety profile of the vaginal progesterone gel was as expected, with no new safety issue identified.

Conclusion

The vaginal progesterone gel was efficacious, with a safety profile as expected, in this study in Japanese women undergoing IVF/ET cycles.

Combined progesterone (IM + V) versus vaginal progesterone for luteal support in cleavage-stage embryo transfer cycles of good prognosis patients

Many reports led to the consensus on the use of progesterone (P) for luteal-phase support. Vaginal P application is the method of choice due to its simplicity and high patient convenience but is hampered by application difficulties and personal or cultural aversions. Inappropriate vaginal P use may alter successful implantation, leading physicians to consider alternate P application routes. A worldwide survey revealed that intramuscular plus vaginal P (combined P) is the method used in nearly one-third of in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles, particularly in Asia and North America; unfortunately, the outcomes of this approach have not been clearly elucidated. In the current analysis, we evaluated any additional benefit of short course parenteral P in addition to vaginal P capsules during a specific period in terms of implantation, pregnancy rates, miscarriages and ectopic pregnancies in cleavage stage embryo transfer (ET) cycles of good-prognosis patients. Despite significantly higher implantation rates in the combined arm, clinical and ongoing pregnancies were comparable in both groups, whereas a trend toward increased pregnancy rates was observed with combined support. The available data are too limited to draw conclusions.

Crinone Gel for Luteal Phase Support in Frozen-Thawed Embryo Transfer Cycles: A Prospective Randomized Clinical Trial in the Chinese Population

To compare Crinone vaginal progesterone gel with intramuscularly injected progesterone for luteal phase support in progesterone-supplemented frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) cycles, a randomized prospective study of patients qualified for FET was conducted between September 2010 and January 2013 at a hospital in Shanghai, China. From the day of transformation into secretory phase endometrium (day 0), Crinone vaginal gel (90 mg/d) was administered to patients in the Gel Group, while progesterone (40 mg/d) was injected intramuscularly in patients in the Inj Group (n = 750 per group). All patients received oral dydrogesterone (20 mg/d) and estradiol valerate (4–8 mg/d). Day 3 embryos with the highest pre-frozen scores were transferred to patients in the two groups and the clinical outcomes compared. This study comprised 1,500 cycles (750 in each group). Twenty-nine cycles in the Gel Group and 24 in the Inj Group were withdrawn. There were no significant differences between groups in age, endometrial thickness, endometrial preparation time or number of embryos transferred. No significant differences were observed between the Gel Group and Inj Group in the rates of live birth (32.6% vs. 31.7%, P = 0.71), clinical pregnancy (40.1% vs. 40.6%, P = 0.831), implantation (25.8% vs. 25.3%, P = 0.772), abortion (16.3% vs. 18.3%, P = 0.514) or ectopic pregnancy (2.8% vs. 4.4%, P = 0.288). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that the odds ratios (95% confidence intervals) for the rates of live birth, clinical pregnancy, abortion and ectopic pregnancy (Gel Group relative to Inj Group) were 1.036 (0.829–1.295), 0.971 (0.785–1.200), 0.919 (0.595–1.420) and 0.649 (0.261–1.614), respectively. Our study revealed that using Crinone vaginal gel in FET cycles achieved similar pregnancy outcomes to intramuscular progesterone, indicating that vaginal gel is a viable alternative to intramuscular injection.

Luteal phase support for assisted reproduction cycles

BACKGROUND

Progesterone prepares the endometrium for pregnancy by stimulating proliferation in response to human chorionic gonadotropin(hCG) produced by the corpus luteum. This occurs in the luteal phase of the menstrual cycle. In assisted reproduction techniques(ART), progesterone and/or hCG levels are low, so the luteal phase is supported with progesterone, hCG or gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists to improve implantation and pregnancy rates.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the relative effectiveness and safety of methods of luteal phase support provided to subfertile women undergoing assisted reproduction.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched databases including the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group (MDSG) Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO and trial registers. We conducted searches in November 2014, and further searches on 4 August 2015.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of luteal phase support using progesterone, hCG or GnRH agonist supplementation in ART cycles.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Three review authors independently selected trials, extracted data and assessed risk of bias. We calculated odds ratios (ORs) and 95%confidence intervals (CIs) for each comparison and combined data when appropriate using a fixed-effect model. Our primary out come was live birth or ongoing pregnancy. The overall quality of the evidence was assessed using GRADE methods.

MAIN RESULTS

Ninety-four women RCTs (26,198 women) were included. Most studies had unclear or high risk of bias in most domains. The main limitations in the evidence were poor reporting of study methods and imprecision due to small sample sizes.1. hCG vs placebo/no treatment (five RCTs, 746 women)There was no evidence of differences between groups in live birth or ongoing pregnancy (OR 1.67, 95% CI 0.90 to 3.12, three RCTs,527 women, I2 = 24%, very low-quality evidence, but I2 of 61% was found for the subgroup of ongoing pregnancy) with a random effects model. hCG increased the risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) (1 RCT, OR 4.28, 95% CI 1.91 to 9.6, low quality evidence).2. Progesterone vs placebo/no treatment (eight RCTs, 875 women)Evidence suggests a higher rate of live birth or ongoing pregnancy in the progesterone group (OR 1.77, 95% CI 1.09 to 2.86, five RCTs, 642 women, I2 = 35%, very low-quality evidence). OHSS was not reported.3. Progesterone vs hCG regimens (16 RCTs, 2162 women)hCG regimens included comparisons of progesterone versus hCG and progesterone versus progesterone + hCG. No evidence showed differences between groups in live birth or ongoing pregnancy (OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.38, five RCTs, 833 women, I2 = 0%, low quality evidence) or in the risk of OHSS (four RCTs, 615 women, progesterone vs hCG OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.34; four RCTs,678 women; progesterone vs progesterone plus hCG, OR 0.34, 95% CI 0.09 to 1.26, low-quality evidence).4. Progesterone vs progesterone with oestrogen (16 RCTs, 2577 women)No evidence was found of differences between groups in live birth or ongoing pregnancy (OR 1.12, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.38, nine RCTs,1651 women, I2 = 0%, low-quality evidence) or OHSS (OR 0.56, 95% CI 0.2 to 1.63, two RCTs, 461 women, I2 = 0%, low-quality evidence).5. Progesterone vs progesterone + GnRH agonist (seven RCTs, 1708 women)Live birth or ongoing pregnancy rates were lower in the progesterone-only group and increased in women who received progester one and one or more GnRH agonist doses (OR 0.62, 95% CI 0.48 to 0.81, nine RCTs, 2861 women, I2 = 55%, random effects, low quality evidence). Statistical heterogeneity for this comparison was high because of unexplained variation in the effect size, but the direction of effect was consistent across studies. OHSS was reported in one study only (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.33 to 3.01, 1 RCT, 300 women, very low quality evidence).6. Progesterone regimens (45 RCTs, 13,814 women)The included studies reported nine different comparisons between progesterone regimens. Findings for live birth or ongoing pregnancy were as follows: intramuscular (IM) versus oral: OR 0.71, 95% CI 0.14 to 3.66 (one RCT, 40 women, very low-quality evidence);IM versus vaginal/rectal: OR 1.24, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.5 (seven RCTs, 2309 women, I2 = 71%, very low-quality evidence); vaginal/rectal versus oral: OR 1.19, 95% CI 0.83 to 1.69 (four RCTs, 857 women, I2 = 32%, low-quality evidence); low-dose versus high-dose vaginal: OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.84 to 1.11 (five RCTs, 3720 women, I2 = 0%, moderate-quality evidence); short versus long protocol:OR 1.04, 95% CI 0.79 to 1.36 (five RCTs, 1205 women, I2 = 0%, low-quality evidence); micronised versus synthetic: OR 0.9, 95%CI 0.53 to 1.55 (two RCTs, 470 women, I2 = 0%, low-quality evidence); vaginal ring versus gel: OR 1.09, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.36 (oneRCT, 1271 women, low-quality evidence); subcutaneous versus vaginal gel: OR 0.92, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.14 (two RCTs, 1465 women,I2 = 0%, low-quality evidence); and vaginal versus rectal: OR 1.28, 95% CI 0.64 to 2.54 (one RCT, 147 women, very low-quality evidence). OHSS rates were reported for only two of these comparisons: IM versus oral, and low versus high-dose vaginal. No evidence showed a difference between groups.7. Progesterone and oestrogen regimens (two RCTs, 1195 women)The included studies compared two different oestrogen protocols. No evidence was found to suggest differences in live birth or ongoing pregnancy rates between a short and a long protocol (OR 1.08, 95% CI 0.81 to 1.43, one RCT, 910 women, low-quality evidence) or between a low dose and a high dose of oestrogen (OR 0.65, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.13, one RCT, 285 women, very low-quality evidence).Neither study reported OHSS.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Both progesterone and hCG during the luteal phase are associated with higher rates of live birth or ongoing pregnancy than placebo.The addition of GnRHa to progesterone is associated with an improvement in pregnancy outcomes. OHSS rates are increased with hCG compared to placebo (only study only). The addition of oestrogen does not seem to improve outcomes. The route of progester one administration is not associated with an improvement in outcomes.

Gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist triggering is effective, even at a low dose, for final oocyte maturation in ART cycles: Case series

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the efficacy of low-dose gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist for final oocyte maturation in females undergoing assisted reproductive treatment (ART) cycles.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Nine females undergoing ovarian stimulation in a GnRH antagonist protocol who received triptorelin 0.1 mg to trigger final oocyte maturation were included. Treatment outcomes of these patients were compared with those of controls, matched for age and oocyte number (n=14), who received 0.2 mg triptorelin at the same time. The luteal phase was supported with vaginal micronized progesterone and oral estradiol hemihydrate 2 mg twice daily.

RESULTS

The mean (±) numbers of retrieved, metaphase II, and fertilized oocytes were 15.66±7.82, 14±7.28, and 10.11±5.86, respectively. The implantation and clinical pregnancy rates were 46.1% and 71.4%, respectively. Of the pregnancies, 2 were live births, 1 was a preterm birth (twins), 2 are on-going, and 2 ended as miscarriages. No case of OHSS was encountered. On comparison of the results of these patients (fresh cycles; n=7) with those of matched controls, there were no significant differences in terms of retrieved mature oocytes, implantation rates, or clinical pregnancy rates (p>0.05).

CONCLUSION

These findings suggest that low-dose GnRH agonist triggering has similar efficacy as standard doses in terms of retrieved mature oocytes and clinical pregnancy rates in in vitro fertilization cycles.

Timing luteal support in assisted reproductive technology: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To summarize the available published randomized controlled trial data regarding timing of P supplementation during the luteal phase of patients undergoing assisted reproductive technology (ART).

DESIGN

A systematic review.

SETTING

Not applicable.

PATIENT(S)

Undergoing IVF.

INTERVENTION(S)

Different starting times of P for luteal support.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Clinical pregnancy (PR) and live birth rates.

RESULT(S)

Five randomized controlled trials were identified that met inclusion criteria with a total of 872 patients. A planned meta-analysis was not performed because of a high degree of clinical heterogeneity with regard to the timing, dose, and route of P. Two studies compared P initiated before oocyte retrieval versus the day of oocyte retrieval and PRs were 5%-12% higher when starting P on the day of oocyte retrieval. One study compared starting P on day 6 after retrieval versus day 3, reporting a 16% decrease in pregnancy in the day 6 group. Trials comparing P start times on the day of oocyte retrieval versus 2 or 3 days after retrieval showed no significant differences in pregnancy.

CONCLUSION(S)

There appears to be a window for P start time between the evening of oocyte retrieval and day 3 after oocyte retrieval. Although some studies have suggested a potential benefit in delaying vaginal P start time to 2 days after oocyte retrieval, this review could not find randomized controlled trials to adequately assess this. Further randomized clinical trials are needed to better define P start time for luteal support after ART.

Sexual absorption of vaginal progesterone: a randomized control trial

Objective. To determine if sexual intercourse reduces absorption of vaginal progesterone gel in women and to determine if progesterone is absorbed by the male during intercourse. Study Design. Prospective, randomized, cross over, controlled study of 20 reproductive-aged women and their male sexual partners randomized to receive vaginal progesterone gel (Crinone 8% gel, Actavis Inc., USA) or placebo cream. Serum progesterone for both male and female partners were measured 10 hours after intercourse. One week later, subjects were crossed over to receive the opposite formulation. In the third week, women used progesterone gel at night and abstained from intercourse. Results. Serum progesterone was significantly reduced with vaginal progesterone gel + intercourse compared with vaginal progesterone gel + abstinence (P = 0.0075). Men absorbed significant progesterone during intercourse with a female partner using vaginal progesterone gel compared to placebo (P = 0.0008). Conclusion(s). Vaginal progesterone gel is reduced in women after intercourse which may decrease drug efficacy during luteal phase support. Because men absorb low levels of progesterone during intercourse, exposure could cause adverse effects such as decreased libido. This study is registered under Clinical Trial number NCT01959464.

Oral dydrogesterone versus vaginal progesterone gel in the luteal phase support: randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

To compare efficacy, satisfaction and tolerability of oral dydrogesterone and micronized vaginal progesterone gel used for luteal supplementation.

STUDY DESIGN

Randomized controlled trial. A total of 853 infertile women undergoing IVF/ICSI treatment in University Hospital Center "Sisters of Mercy", Zagreb, Croatia. Luteal support was provided as Crinone 8%(®) vaginal progesterone gel (90mg) administered daily, or oral dydrogesterone Duphaston(®) (2× 10mg) administered two times daily. Progesterone was administered from the day of oocyte retrieval (day 0) till pregnancy test or in a case of pregnancy, until week 10.

RESULTS

The on-going pregnancy rates were comparable between Crinone 8%(®) vaginal progesterone gel and oral dydrogesterone - Duphaston(®) (28.1% versus 30.3%; OR 1.11 (0.82-1.49 with 95% CI)). Overall satisfaction and tolerability were significantly higher in the dydrogesterone group than in the Crinone group. Vaginal bleeding, interference with coitus and local adverse side effects such as vaginal irritation and discharge occurred significantly more in Crinone group than in dydrogesterone group.

CONCLUSIONS

Oral dydrogesterone is effective drug, well tolerated and accepted among patients and can be considered for routine luteal support.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT01178931; www.clinicaltrials.gov.

Patients' administration preferences: progesterone vaginal insert (Endometrin®) compared to intramuscular progesterone for Luteal phase support

Background

Administration of exogenous progesterone for luteal phase support has become a standard of practice. Intramuscular (IM) injections of progesterone in oil (PIO) and vaginal administration of progesterone are the primary routes of administration. This report describes the administration preferences expressed by women with infertility that were given progesterone vaginal insert (PVI) or progesterone in oil injections (PIO) for luteal phase support during fresh IVF cycles.

Methods

A questionnaire to assess the tolerability, convenience, and ease of administration of PVI and PIO given for luteal phase support was completed by infertile women diagnosed with PCOS and planning to undergo IVF. The women participated in an open-label study of highly purified human menopausal gonadotropins (HP-hMG) compared with recombinant FSH (rFSH) given for stimulation of ovulation.

Results

Most women commented on the convenience and ease of administration of PVI, while a majority of women who administered IM PIO described experiencing pain. In addition, their partners often indicated that they had experienced at least some anxiety regarding the administration of PIO. The most distinguishing difference between PVI and PIO in this study was the overall patient preference for PVI. Despite the need to administer PVI either twice a day or three times a day, 82.6% of the patients in the PVI group found it “very” or “somewhat convenient” compared with 44.9% of women in the PIO group.

Conclusions

The results of this comprehensive, prospective patient survey, along with findings from other similar reports, suggest that PVI provides an easy-to-use and convenient method for providing the necessary luteal phase support for IVF cycles without the pain and inconvenience of daily IM PIO. Moreover, ongoing pregnancy rates with the well-tolerated PVI were as good as the pregnancy rates with PIO.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrial.gov, NCT00805935

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1742-4755-11-78) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

A randomized, controlled trial comparing the efficacy and safety of aqueous subcutaneous progesterone with vaginal progesterone for luteal phase support of in vitro fertilization

STUDY QUESTION

Is the ongoing pregnancy rate with a new aqueous formulation of subcutaneous progesterone (Prolutex(®)) non-inferior to vaginal progesterone (Endometrin(®)) when used for luteal phase support of in vitro fertilization?

SUMMARY ANSWER

In the per-protocol (PP) population, the ongoing pregnancy rates per oocyte retrieval at 12 weeks of gestation were comparable between Prolutex and Endometrin (41.6 versus 44.4%), with a difference between groups of -2.8% (95% confidence interval (CI) -9.7, 4.2), consistent with the non-inferiority of subcutaneous progesterone for luteal phase support.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

Luteal phase support has been clearly demonstrated to improve pregnancy rates in women undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF). Because of the increased risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome associated with the use of hCG, progesterone has become the treatment of choice for luteal phase support.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

This prospective, open-label, randomized, controlled, parallel-group, multicentre, two-arm, non-inferiority study was performed at eight fertility clinics. A total of 800 women, aged 18-42 years, with a BMI of ≤ 30 kg/m(2), with <3 prior completed assisted reproductive technology (ART) cycles, exhibiting baseline (Days 2-3) FSH of ≤ 15 IU/L and undergoing IVF at 8 centres (seven private, one academic) in the USA, were enrolled from January 2009 through June 2011.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

In total, 800 women undergoing IVF were randomized after retrieval of at least three oocytes to an aqueous preparation of progesterone administered subcutaneously (25 mg daily) or vaginal progesterone (100 mg bid daily). Randomization was performed to enrol 100 patients at each site using a randomization list that was generated with Statistical Analysis Software (SAS(®)). If a viable pregnancy occurred, progesterone treatment was continued up to 12 weeks of gestation.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

Using a PP analysis, which included all patients who received an embryo transfer (Prolutex = 392; Endometrin = 390), the ongoing pregnancy rate per retrieval for subcutaneous versus vaginal progesterone was 41.6 versus 44.4%, with a difference between groups of -2.8% (95% CI -9.7, 4.2), consistent with the non-inferiority of subcutaneous progesterone for luteal phase support. In addition, rates of initial positive β-hCG (56.4% subcutaneous versus 59.0% vaginal; 95% CI -9.5, 4.3), clinical intrauterine pregnancy with fetal cardiac activity (42.6 versus 46.4%; 95% CI -10.8, 3.2), implantation defined as number of gestational sacs divided by number of embryos transferred (33.2 versus 35.1%; 95% CI -7.6, 4.0), live birth (41.1 versus 43.1%; 95% CI -8.9, 4.9) and take-home baby (41.1 versus 42.6%; 95% CI -8.4, 5.4) were comparable. Both formulations were well-tolerated, with no difference in serious adverse events. Analysis with the intention-to-treat population also demonstrated no difference for any outcomes between the treatment groups.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

The conclusions are limited to the progesterone dosing regimen studied and duration of treatment for the patient population examined in this study.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

Subcutaneous progesterone represents a novel option for luteal phase support in women undergoing IVF who for personal reasons prefer not to use a vaginal preparation or who wish to avoid the side effects of vaginal or i.m. routes of administration.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS

The study was funded by Institut Biochimique SA (IBSA). CAJ, BC, ST and CJ are employees of IBSA. FH currently consults for IBSA.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT00828191.

Progesterone replacement with vaginal gel versus i.m. injection: cycle and pregnancy outcomes in IVF patients receiving vitrified blastocysts

STUDY QUESTION

Does the type of luteal support affect pregnancy outcomes in recipients of vitrified blastocysts?

SUMMARY ANSWER

Luteal support with vaginal progesterone gel or i.m. progesterone (IMP) results in comparable implantation and pregnancy rates in IVF patients receiving vitrified blastocysts.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

In fresh IVF cycles, both IMP and vaginal progesterone have become the standard of care for luteal phase support. Due to conflicting data in replacement cycles, IMP is often considered to be the standard of care.

STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION

Retrospective analysis of 920 frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles between 1 January 2010 and 1 September 2012.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS

Patients from a large, private practice undergoing autologous and donor FET using IMP or vaginal progesterone gel for luteal support were included in the analysis. IMP was used for luteal support in 682 FET cycles and vaginal progesterone gel was used in 238 FET cycles. Standard clinical outcomes of positive serum hCG levels, implantation, clinical pregnancy, spontaneous abortion and live birth were reported.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The IMP and vaginal progesterone gel groups had similar patient demographics for all characteristics assessed. Implantation rates (46.4 versus 45.6%, P = 0.81), clinical pregnancy rates (61.7 versus 60.5%, P = 0.80) and live birth rates (49.1 versus 48.9%, P > 0.99) were not significantly different between IMP and vaginal progesterone gel, respectively.

LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION

This study is limited by its retrospective design and by its lack of randomization to the type of luteal support. In addition, because no a priori expected rates of success could be provided for this retrospective investigation, it was not possible to estimate statistical power associated with the various outcomes presented.

WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

With the recent trends toward single embryo transfer (SET) and use of vitrified blastocysts in FET cycles, our data with ∼40% of cycles being SET and use of exclusively vitrified blastocysts are more relevant to current practices than previous studies.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS

Support for data collection and analysis was provided by Actavis, Inc. D.S. has received honoraria for lectures and participation in Scientific Advisory Boards for Actavis, Inc. J.P. is an employee of Actavis, Inc. N.E. has received payment from Actavis, Inc., for her time for data collection. H.H. has received payment from Actavis, Inc., for statistical analyses. Z.P.N. has nothing to disclose.

Embryo Transfer Catheter Contamination With Intravaginal Progesterone Preparations in a Simulated Embryo Transfer Model Impairs Mouse Embryo Development: Are There Implications for Human Embryo Transfer Technique?

OBJECTIVES

To study the effect of embryo transfer (ET) catheter contact with intravaginal progesterone preparations on mouse embryo development.

STUDY DESIGN

In a simulated ET model, ET catheters were loaded with culture medium, placed in contact with intravaginal progesterone gel (Crinone 8%) or micronized progesterone intravaginal inserts (Endometrin 100 mg), and the intracatheter culture medium flushed. Embryos were cultured in the flushed culture medium at variable dilutions for variable lengths of time. Proportion of embryos progressing to blastocyst, embryo cell number, and apoptotic index was analyzed.

RESULTS

None of the embryos cultured in undiluted progesterone-exposed medium progressed to blastocyst. The likelihood of achieving blastocyst status and the average embryo cell number increased significantly as culture media exposed to intravaginal progesterone was diluted. A significant decrease in cell number became apparent between 1 and 2 hours of exposure. Interestingly, the apoptotic index was significantly higher in progesterone-exposed embryos as compared to unexposed embryos.

CONCLUSION

The contamination of ET catheter with intravaginal progesterone significantly impairs mouse embryo development, likely due in part to increased programmed cell death.

Subcutaneous progesterone versus vaginal progesterone gel for luteal phase support in in vitro fertilization: a noninferiority randomized controlled study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the safety, efficacy, and tolerability of subcutaneous progesterone (Prolutex, 25 mg; IBSA Institut Biochimique SA) with vaginal progesterone gel (Crinone, 8%; Merck Serono) for luteal phase support (LPS) in assisted reproduction technologies (ART) patients.

DESIGN

Prospective, open-label, randomized, controlled, parallel-group, multicenter, two-arm, noninferiority study.

SETTING

Thirteen European fertility clinics.

PATIENT(S)

A total of 683 ART patients randomized to two groups: Prolutex, 25 mg subcutaneously daily (n = 339); and Crinone, 90 mg 8% gel daily (n = 344).

INTERVENTION(S)

In vitro fertilization and embryo transfer were performed according to site-specific protocols. On the day of oocyte retrieval, Prolutex or Crinone gel was begun for LPS and continued for up to 10 weeks.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Ongoing pregnancy rate.

RESULT(S)

The primary end point, ongoing pregnancy rates at 10 weeks of treatment were 27.4% and 30.5% in the Prolutex and Crinone groups, respectively (intention to treat [ITT]). The nonsignificant difference between the groups was -3.09% (95% confidence interval [CI] -9.91-3.73), indicating noninferiority of Prolutex to Crinone. Delivery and live birth rates resulted to be equivalent between the two treatments (26.8% vs. 29.9% in the Prolutex and Crinone groups, respectively [ITT]; difference -3.10 [95% CI -9.87-3.68]). No statistically significant differences were reported for any of the other secondary efficacy endpoints, including comfort of usage and overall satisfaction.

CONCLUSION(S)

Implantation rate, pregnancy rate, live birth rate, and early miscarriage rate for Prolutex were similar to those for Crinone. The adverse event profiles were similar and Prolutex was safe and well tolerated.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT00827983.

A randomized trial comparing the endometrial effects of daily subcutaneous administration of 25 mg and 50 mg progesterone in aqueous preparation

OBJECTIVE

To study the efficacy of a new P preparation in aqueous solution for subcutaneous injection for inducing the predecidual transformation of the endometrium.

DESIGN

Prospective, single-blinded, randomized, parallel pilot trial.

SETTING

University-affiliated clinical research center.

PATIENT(S)

Twenty-five regularly cycling female volunteers.

INTERVENTION(S)

Volunteers, aged 18-45 years, body mass index 19-25 kg/m(2), whose ovaries were suppressed with a GnRH agonist were estrogenized for 14 or 21 days with the use of transdermal systems delivering 0.1 mg/d E₂. After confirming that the endometrial thickness was >7 mm, the women were randomized to 25 mg or 50 mg of subcutaneous P injections daily for 11 days, after which the endometrium was sampled with the use of a Pipelle device. The endometrial biopsies were evaluated by two independent pathologists. Adverse events and subjective tolerance were checked every day by the study investigator.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Predecidual changes in endometrial biopsies obtained after 11 days of subcutaneous administration of P.

RESULT(S)

Of 24 biopsies performed (one dropout), 22 provided tissue for histologic analysis. Evidence of predecidual changes in the endometrial stroma was found in 100% of the cases, with no differences between the two studied doses.

CONCLUSION(S)

Both doses of the new aqueous P preparation available for subcutaneous administration demonstrated predecidual changes in 100% of the interpretable endometrial biopsies in total absence of endogenous P. This offers good prospect of efficacy in luteal phase support for the lowest dose tested, 25 mg/d, the physiologic amount produced daily by the ovary during the midluteal phase.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT00377923.

Vaginal progesterone in risk reduction of preterm birth in women with short cervix in the midtrimester of pregnancy

Preterm birth is a major health problem for the neonate, family, country, and society in general. Despite many risk factors being identified for women destined to deliver preterm, short cervical length detected on transvaginal ultrasound is the most plausible, practical and sensitive risk factor for prediction of spontaneous preterm birth. The definition of short cervix has varied in various studies, but most commonly accepted is ≤2.5 cm in the midtrimester of pregnancy, though risk of spontaneous preterm birth (sPTB) increases as the cervical length decreases. Vaginal progesterone, a naturally occurring steroid hormone, is the most bioavailable form of progesterone for uterine and cervical effects with the fewest side effects. Multiple prospective studies have consistently shown its benefits in decreasing sPTB rate in women with asymptomatic midtrimester short cervix. The safety for mother and fetus, and tolerability of vaginal progesterone, particularly the gel form, is also well established. Vaginal progesterone is a minimally invasive intervention that is not painful and is very safe, with reasonable cost where the benefits (even if argued to be small) clearly outweigh the risks. Thus there should be little hesitation for implementation of universal transvaginal cervical length screening and preventive vaginal progesterone treatment for women with short cervix.

Intramuscular progesterone versus 8% Crinone vaginal gel for luteal phase support for day 3 cryopreserved embryo transfer

OBJECTIVE

To compare outcomes after intramuscular progesterone (IMP) or 8% Crinone vaginal gel for luteal support for day 3 cryopreserved embryo transfer (CET).

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study with multivariable analysis.

SETTING

Academic medical center.

PATIENT(S)

All autologous and donor egg in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection patients who had a day 3 CET from January 1, 2008, to April 30, 2011, with luteal support using 25-50 mg/d IMP or 8% Crinone twice daily, initiated 3 days before the CET.

INTERVENTION(S)

None.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Implantation rate, clinical pregnancy, and live birth rates per CET.

RESULT(S)

IMP (n = 440) and Crinone (n = 298) recipients were similar for all demographic characteristics and cycle parameters assessed. Although implantation rates did not differ significantly between the two groups (Crinone vs. IMP: 19.6% vs. 30.4%), women supplemented with Crinone had significantly lower rates of clinical pregnancy (36.9% vs. 51.1%) and live birth (24.4% vs. 39.1%) compared with those on IMP.

CONCLUSION(S)

We observed that day 3 CET cycles with 8% Crinone luteal support had a 44% and 49% lower odds of clinical pregnancy and live birth, respectively, compared with those with IMP support. Further studies are required to identify the optimal timing and dose of 8% Crinone vaginal gel for use in CET cycles.

Vaginal (Crinone 8%) gel vs. intramuscular progesterone in oil for luteal phase support in in vitro fertilization: a large prospective trial

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of intravaginal and IMP for luteal phase support in IVF cycles.

DESIGN

Prospective trial.

SETTING

Tertiary care private practice.

PATIENT(S)

Women 25-44 years old with infertility necessitating treatment with IVF. From April 1, 2008-April 1, 2009, 511 consecutive patients were enrolled; 474 completed participation, and 37 were excluded for no autologous ET (freeze all, donor recipients, failed fertilization/cleavage). There were no demographic differences between the two treatment groups.

INTERVENTION(S)

Luteal phase support using either Crinone or P in oil starting 2 days following oocyte retrieval.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Pregnancy and delivery rates stratified by patient age.

RESULT(S)

Overall, patients who received vaginal P had higher pregnancy (70.9% vs. 64.2%) and delivery (51.7% vs. 45.4%) rates than did patients who received IMP. Patients <35 who received vaginal P had significantly higher delivery rates (65.7% vs. 51.1%) than did patients who received IMP. There were no differences, regardless of age, in the rates of biochemical pregnancy, miscarriage, or ectopics.

CONCLUSION(S)

In younger patients undergoing IVF, support of the luteal phase with Crinone produces significantly higher pregnancy rates than does IMP. Crinone and IMP appear to be equally efficacious in the older patient.

Luteal phase support for assisted reproduction cycles

BACKGROUND

Progesterone prepares the endometrium for pregnancy by stimulating proliferation in response to human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG), which is produced by the corpus luteum. This occurs in the luteal phase of the menstrual cycle. In assisted reproduction techniques (ART) the progesterone or hCG levels, or both, are low and the natural process is insufficient, so the luteal phase is supported with either progesterone, hCG or gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists. Luteal phase support improves implantation rate and thus pregnancy rates but the ideal method is still unclear. This is an update of a Cochrane Review published in 2004 (Daya 2004).

OBJECTIVES

To determine the relative effectiveness and safety of methods of luteal phase support in subfertile women undergoing assisted reproductive technology.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group (MDSG) Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects (DARE), LILACS, conference abstracts on the ISI Web of Knowledge, OpenSigle for grey literature from Europe, and ongoing clinical trials registered online. The final search was in February 2011.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials of luteal phase support in ART investigating progesterone, hCG or GnRH agonist supplementation in in vitro fertilisation (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles. Quasi-randomised trials and trials using frozen transfers or donor oocyte cycles were excluded.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We extracted data per women and three review authors independently assessed risk of bias. We contacted the original authors when data were missing or the risk of bias was unclear. We entered all data in six different comparisons. We calculated the Peto odds ratio (Peto OR) for each comparison.

MAIN RESULTS

Sixty-nine studies with a total of 16,327 women were included. We assessed most of the studies as having an unclear risk of bias, which we interpreted as a high risk of bias. Because of the great number of different comparisons, the average number of included studies in a single comparison was only 1.5 for live birth and 6.1 for clinical pregnancy.Five studies (746 women) compared hCG versus placebo or no treatment. There was no evidence of a difference between hCG and placebo or no treatment except for ongoing pregnancy: Peto OR 1.75 (95% CI 1.09 to 2.81), suggesting a benefit from hCG. There was a significantly higher risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) when hCG was used (Peto OR 3.62, 95% CI 1.85 to 7.06).There were eight studies (875 women) in the second comparison, progesterone versus placebo or no treatment. The results suggested a significant effect in favour of progesterone for the live birth rate (Peto OR 2.95, 95% CI 1.02 to 8.56) based on one study. For clinical pregnancy (CPR) the results also suggested a significant result in favour of progesterone (Peto OR 1.83, 95% CI 1.29 to 2.61) based on seven studies. For the other outcomes the results indicated no difference in effect.The third comparison (15 studies, 2117 women) investigated progesterone versus hCG regimens. The hCG regimens were subgrouped into comparisons of progesterone versus hCG and progesterone versus progesterone + hCG. The results did not indicate a difference of effect between the interventions, except for OHSS. Subgroup analysis of progesterone versus progesterone + hCG showed a significant benefit from progesterone (Peto OR 0.45, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.79).The fourth comparison (nine studies, 1571 women) compared progesterone versus progesterone + oestrogen. Outcomes were subgrouped by route of administration. The results for clinical pregnancy rate in the subgroup progesterone versus progesterone + transdermal oestrogen suggested a significant benefit from progesterone + oestrogen. There was no evidence of a difference in effect for other outcomes.Six studies (1646 women) investigated progesterone versus progesterone + GnRH agonist. We subgrouped the studies for single-dose GnRH agonist and multiple-dose GnRH agonist. For the live birth, clinical pregnancy and ongoing pregnancy rate the results suggested a significant effect in favour of progesterone + GnRH agonist. The Peto OR for the live birth rate was 2.44 (95% CI 1.62 to 3.67), for the clinical pregnancy rate was 1.36 (95% CI 1.11 to 1.66) and for the ongoing pregnancy rate was 1.31 (95% CI 1.03 to 1.67). The results for miscarriage and multiple pregnancy did not indicate a difference of effect.The last comparison (32 studies, 9839 women) investigated different progesterone regimens:intramuscular (IM) versus oral administration, IM versus vaginal or rectal administration, vaginal or rectal versus oral administration, low-dose vaginal versus high-dose vaginal progesterone administration, short protocol versus long protocol and micronized progesterone versus synthetic progesterone. The main results of this comparison did not indicate a difference of effect except in some subgroup analyses. For the outcome clinical pregnancy, subgroup analysis of micronized progesterone versus synthetic progesterone showed a significant benefit from synthetic progesterone (Peto OR 0.79, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.96). For the outcome multiple pregnancy, the subgroup analysis of IM progesterone versus oral progesterone suggested a significant benefit from oral progesterone (Peto OR 4.39, 95% CI 1.28 to 15.01).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review showed a significant effect in favour of progesterone for luteal phase support, favouring synthetic progesterone over micronized progesterone. Overall, the addition of other substances such as estrogen or hCG did not seem to improve outcomes. We also found no evidence favouring a specific route or duration of administration of progesterone. We found that hCG, or hCG plus progesterone, was associated with a higher risk of OHSS. The use of hCG should therefore be avoided. There were significant results showing a benefit from addition of GnRH agonist to progesterone for the outcomes of live birth, clinical pregnancy and ongoing pregnancy. For now, progesterone seems to be the best option as luteal phase support, with better pregnancy results when synthetic progesterone is used.

Comparison of oral dydrogestrone with progesterone gel and micronized progesterone for luteal support in 1,373 women undergoing in vitro fertilization: a randomized clinical study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of oral dydrogesterone with that of micronized vaginal P gel and micronized P capsule for luteal supplementation.

DESIGN

Prospective, randomized clinical study.

SETTING

Institute of Reproductive Medicine, Kolkata, India.

PATIENT(S)

A total of 1,373 infertile women undergoing IVF participated.

INTERVENTION(S)

Micronized P gel, P capsule, and oral dydrogesterone were administered for luteal support and compared.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Demographic profile and pregnancy and miscarriage rates.

RESULT(S)

The overall pregnancy rate and miscarriage rate were comparable among the three groups.

CONCLUSION(S)

Oral dydrogesterone seems to be a promising drug for luteal support in woman undergoing IVF.

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

OBJECTIVE

To compare patterns of luteal phase bleeding (LPB) in IVF cycles supplemented with Crinone and with intramuscular progesterone (IMP) and to evaluate the impact of luteal estrogen supplementation on LPB.

DESIGN

Prospective, randomized trial and post hoc analysis.

SETTING

University-affiliated IVF unit.

PATIENT(S)

Women under age 40 with day 3 FSH <15 mIU/mL were randomized to receive either Crinone or IMP for luteal phase support. Luteal estrogen was prescribed according to clinical protocols. Three hundred sixty-five patients were queried about LPB after completion of their IVF cycles.

INTERVENTION(S)

Luteal phase supplementation with Crinone or IMP and with estrogen.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Incidence of LPB in IVF cycles supplemented with Crinone and IMP and impact of luteal estrogen on the occurrence of LPB.

RESULT(S)

There was no difference in the overall incidence of LPB between patients treated with Crinone and those treated with IMP (33.2% vs. 25.7%). LPB occurred with equal frequency among pregnant patients in both arms (Crinone 21.9% vs. IMP 18.6%). Only nonpregnant women had a higher incidence of LPB when treated with Crinone compared with treatment with IMP (56.5% vs.38.1%). Estrogen supplementation decreased the occurrence of LPB among all participants but did not impact pregnancy rates.

CONCLUSION(S)

Only nonpregnant women had a higher incidence of bleeding in the luteal phase when supplemented with Crinone compared with treatment with IMP. IMP delays menses in nonpregnant cycles without affecting pregnancy rates. Luteal estrogen decreases LPB without impacting cycle outcomes.