Prospective randomized comparison of human chorionic gonadotropin versus intramuscular progesterone for luteal-phase support in assisted reproduction

Comparison of luteal support protocols in fresh IVF/ICSI cycles: a network meta-analysis

Despite the proven superiority of various luteal phase support protocols (LPS) over placebo in view of improved pregnancy rates in fresh cycles of IVF (in vitro fertilization) and ICSI (intracytoplasmic sperm injection) cycles, there is ongoing controversy over specific LPS protocol selection, dosage, and duration. The aim of the present study was to identify the optimal LPS under six core aspects of ART success, clinical pregnancy, live birth as primary outcomes and biochemical pregnancy, miscarriage, multiple pregnancy, ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) events as secondary outcomes. Twelve databases, namely Embase (OVID), MEDLINE (R) (OVID), GlobalHealth (Archive), GlobalHealth, Health and Psychosocial Instruments, Maternity & Infant Care Database (MIDIRS), APA PsycTests, ClinicalTrials.gov, HMIC Health Management Information Consortium, CENTRAL, Web of Science, Scopus and two prospective registers, MedRxiv, Research Square were searched from inception to Aug.1st, 2023, (PROSPERO Registration: CRD42022358986). Only Randomised Controlled Trials (RCTs) were included. Bayesian network meta-analysis (NMA) model was employed for outcome analysis, presenting fixed effects, odds ratios (ORs) with 95% credibility intervals (CrIs). Vaginal Progesterone (VP) was considered the reference LPS given its' clinical relevance. Seventy-six RCTs, comparing 22 interventions, and including 26,536 participants were included in the present NMA. Overall CiNeMa risk of bias was deemed moderate, and network inconsistency per outcome was deemed low (Multiple pregnancy χ2: 0.11, OHSS χ2: 0.26), moderate (Clinical Pregnancy: χ2: 7.02, Live birth χ2: 10.95, Biochemical pregnancy: χ2: 6.60, Miscarriage: χ2: 11.305). Combinatorial regimens, with subcutaneous GnRH-a (SCGnRH-a) on a vaginal progesterone base and oral oestrogen (OE) appeared to overall improve clinical pregnancy events; VP + OE + SCGnRH-a [OR 1.57 (95% CrI 1.11 to 2.22)], VP + SCGnRH-a [OR 1.28 (95% CrI 1.05 to 1.55)] as well as live pregnancy events, VP + OE + SCGnRH-a [OR 8.81 (95% CrI 2.35 to 39.1)], VP + SCGnRH-a [OR 1.76 (95% CrI 1.45 to 2.15)]. Equally, the progesterone free LPS, intramuscular human chorionic gonadotrophin, [OR 9.67 (95% CrI 2.34, 73.2)] was also found to increase live birth events, however was also associated with an increased probability of ovarian hyperstimulation, [OR 1.64 (95% CrI 0.75, 3.71)]. The combination of intramuscular and vaginal progesterone was associated with higher multiple pregnancy events, [OR 7.09 (95% CrI 2.49, 31.)]. Of all LPS protocols, VP + SC GnRH-a was found to significantly reduce miscarriage events, OR 0.54 (95% CrI 0.37 to 0.80). Subgroup analysis according to ovarian stimulation (OS) protocol revealed that the optimal LPS across both long and short OS, taking into account increase in live birth and reduction in miscarriage as well as OHSS events, was VP + SCGnRH-a, with an OR 2.89 [95% CrI 1.08, 2.96] and OR 2.84 [95% CrI 1.35, 6.26] respectively. Overall, NMA data suggest that combinatorial treatments, with the addition of SCGnRH-a on a VP base result in improved clinical pregnancy and live birth events in both GnRH-agonist and antagonist ovarian stimulation protocols.

A randomized double-blinded controlled trial of hCG as luteal phase support in natural cycle frozen embryo transfer

STUDY QUESTION

Does the use of hCG as luteal phase support in natural cycle frozen embryo transfer (FET) increase the ongoing pregnancy rate?

STUDY ANSWER

The use of hCG in natural cycle FET did not improve the ongoing pregnancy rate.

WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY

The use of luteal phase support in stimulated cycles has been associated with higher live-birth rates and the results are similar when using hCG or progesterone.

STUDY DESIGN SIZE, DURATION

This is a randomized double-blinded controlled trial of 450 women recruited between August 2013 and October 2015.

PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING METHODS

Women with regular cycles undergoing natural cycle FET were recruited. Serial serum hormonal concentrations were used to time natural ovulation and at least Day 2 cleavage embryos were replaced. Patients were randomized into either: (i) the treatment group, receiving 1500 IU hCG on the day of FET and 6 days after FET, or (ii) the control group, receiving normal saline on these 2 days.

MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE

The ongoing pregnancy rate [60/225 (26.7%) in the treatment group vs 70/225 (31.3%) in the control group, odds ratio 1.242 (95% CI 0.825-1.869)], implantation rate and miscarriage rate were comparable between the two groups. In the treatment group, there were significantly more cycles with top quality embryos transferred and a significantly higher serum oestradiol level, but a comparable serum progesterone level, 6 days after FET. However, no significant differences were observed in serum oestradiol and progesterone levels 6 days after FET between the pregnant and non-pregnant women. In the multivariate logistic regression, the number of embryos transferred was the only significant factor predictive of the ongoing pregnancy rate after natural cycle FET.

LIMITATIONS REASON FOR CAUTION

This study only included FET with cleavage stage embryos and only hCG, not vaginal progesterone, was used as luteal phase support.

WIDER IMPLANTATIONS OF THE FINDINGS

The findings in this study do not support the use of hCG for luteal phase support in natural cycle FET.

STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS

No external funding was used and there were no competing interests.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

clinicaltrial.gov identifier: NCT01931384.

TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE

23/8/2013.

DATE OF FIRST PATIENT'S ENROLMENT

30/8/2013.

Is human chorionic gonadotropin supplementation beneficial for frozen and thawed embryo transfer in estrogen/progesterone replacement cycles?: A randomized clinical trial

Aim

Human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) is used frequently for luteal support in fresh in vitro fertilization cycles as it induces progesterone secretion from the ovaries after oocyte retrieval and modulates the endometrium for implantation in fresh cycles. In contrast, hCG is not usually used for the transfer of cryopreserved-thawed embryos in estrogen/progesterone replacement cycles because ovulation is suppressed. However, several studies have shown that luteinizing hormone and hCG receptors are present in the human endometrium and that hCG can directly induce the decidualization of endometrial stromal cells in vitro. Thus, this study evaluated whether hCG supplementation can be beneficial for cryopreserved-thawed embryo transfer in estrogen/progesterone replacement cycles.

Methods

One-hundred-and seventy-three cryopreserved-thawed embryo transfer cycles with estrogen/progesterone replacement were divided randomly into two groups. Transdermal oestradiol was used in combination with vaginal progesterone suppositories for HR. The embryo transfer was performed on day 17 and/or day 20 of the HR therapy cycle in both groups. In Group A, 3000 IU of hCG was administered on days 17, 20, and 23. In Group B, hCG was not used.

Results

There was no significant difference in the average age of the patients, the average number of previous assisted reproductive technology cycles, or the average number of embryo transfers between the two groups. The rates of pregnancy and implantation per embryo were 37.2% and 25.3%, respectively, in Group A and 35.6% and 21.7%, respectively, in Group B. The pregnancy and implantation rates were similar in both groups.

Conclusion

Supplementation with hCG is not beneficial for cryopreserved-thawed embryo transfer in estrogen/progesterone replacement cycles.

Vaginal use of micronized progesterone for luteal support.A randomized study comparing Utrogestan® and Crinone® 8

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Luteal phase physiology is distorted by in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles using gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists and antagonists, Controlled ovarian hyperstimulation leads to luteal phase defect and for this reason, luteal phase support is now an integral part of IVF/ICSI-ET programs. The support is provided by hCG, progesterone or GnRH-a. This study compared the efficiency, safety and tolerance of two vaginal micronized progesterones, Utrogestan and Crinone 8%.

METHODS

111 women, 18-40 years old, FSH < 10 IU/L and normal uterus findings were included. The efficiency of the two preparations to provide luteal support was evaluated by the fertilization, implantation, pregnancy and take-home baby rates. The safety was compared through the results of vaginal findings and vaginal inflammation markers before and after treatment. Comparison of tolerance was made by evaluating 21 subjective patient questionnaire parameters.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences between the preparations in terms of efficiency or safety though Crinone 8% was better tolerated.

CONCLUSION

The outcomes of this study suggest that a vaginal gel with micronized progesterone (Crinone 8%) is the optimal choice at this time for luteal support.

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.

A randomized comparison of the efficacy, side effects and patient convenience between vaginal and rectal administration of Cyclogest(®) when used for luteal phase support in ICSI treatment

PURPOSE

This study compares the efficacy, side effects and patient convenience of vaginal and rectal routes of administration of progesterone suppositories (Cyclogest) when used for luteal phase support during in vitro fertilization cycles, through the use of antagonist protocols.

METHODS

147 patients who underwent intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection cycle were randomized on the day of the embryo transfer (ET) by a computer-generated randomization program to receive 400 mg of Cyclogest either vaginally or rectally twice daily for up to 8 weeks. A pregnancy test was conducted 2 weeks after embryo transfer. If the pregnancy test was negative, the application was discontinued. On day 14th after embryo transfer, patient's acceptability and side effects were assessed using a questionnaire which was given to the patients on the day of ET prior to performing the pregnancy test. The clinical pregnancy rate at the 8th week of gestation and the level of luteal progesterone were evaluated.

RESULTS

There were no substantial differences in the demographics or other characteristics between the two groups. There were no significant differences in serum P concentration 6 days after ET, the clinical pregnancy and abortion rates. The difficulty of administration route, the discomforts experienced following administration, and the proportion leaking out on the 14th day were similar between the two groups. Significantly more patients administering the medication per vagina had perineal irritation (21.3 vs. 2.2 %). The prevalence of tenesmus (35.1 vs. 21.1 %) and rectal itching (26.7 vs. 2.8 %) were significantly more in rectal route.

CONCLUSIONS

This study demonstrates that the efficacy of Cyclogest is similar when administered via both the vaginal and rectal routes. Although their side effects differ, the ease of administration for patients and their preference are similar.

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.

Luteal support in reproduction: when, what and how?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Luteal phase support (LPS) is an integral part of the IVF cycles treated by gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogues. There is a worldwide controversy concerning the type of hormones used for LPS, its dose, duration, when to start and when to stop. This review will cover original as well as recent data on this topic.

RECENT FINDINGS

There is a consensus in the literature among IVF centers that LPS is necessary for IVF cycles. Human chorionic gonadotropin is less commonly used than progesterone for LPS because of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome risk. Several studies suggested that intramuscular progesterone is superior to vaginal progesterone for LPS; however, the majority of centers use vaginal progesterone to avoid side effects of intramuscular injection. There is no difference in pregnancy rate whether LPS is started on day of human chorionic gonadotropin, oocyte retrieval or embryo transfer. There is a strong evidence that LPS should be stopped either on the day of pregnancy test or the first ultrasound (6-7 weeks pregnancy). There is no evidence that addition of estrogen will improve pregnancy rate.

SUMMARY

Progesterone is the preferred option for LPS. It should start within 2 days from triggering ovulation and should end on day of beta human chorionic gonadotropin or the day of the first ultrasound (6-7 weeks pregnancy).

Effects of early luteal-phase vaginal progesterone supplementation on the outcome of in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether early luteal-phase vaginal progesterone supplementation improves the outcome of in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer (IVF-ET).

METHODS

A randomized, controlled trial was conducted on 197 women undergoing IVF-ET cycles with human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) as the standard luteal-phase support. The participants were randomly assigned to either the study group or the control group. The study group was given 200 mg micronized progesterone vaginally three times per day starting in the afternoon of oocyte retrieval until the morning of embryo transfer, in addition to the standard hCG luteal-phase support. The control group received only the hCG support. The pregnancy rates and the implantation rates were measured.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in pregnancy rates or implantation rates between groups. However, subgroup analysis revealed significantly higher pregnancy and implantation rates in the study group among those women with fibroids or difficult oocyte retrieval involving uterine puncture (38.7% vs. 15.4% and 26.8% vs. 9.4% respectively, both p = 0.04).

CONCLUSION

Additional early luteal-phase vaginal progesterone supplementation may improve the outcome of IVF-ET in women with fibroids or difficult oocyte retrieval.

WITHDRAWN: Luteal phase support in assisted reproduction cycles

BACKGROUND

The aspiration of the granulosa cells that surround the oocyte and the use of gonadotropin releasing hormone agonists (GnRHa) during assisted reproduction technology (ART) treatment can interfere with the production, during the luteal phase, of progesterone, which is necessary for successful implantation of the embryo. Providing hormonal supplementation during the luteal phase with either progesterone itself, or human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG), which stimulates progesterone production, may improve implantation and, thus, pregnancy rates.

OBJECTIVES

To determine (1) if luteal phase support after assisted reproduction increases the pregnancy rate, (2) the optimal hormone for luteal phase support, i.e. hCG, progesterone, or a combination of both, and (3) the optimal route of progesterone administration.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders & Subfertility Group trials register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (1971 to Dec 2003), EMBASE (1985 to Dec 2003). We handsearched reference lists of relevant articles were scanned, and abstract books from scientific meetings up to December 2003.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials of luteal phase support after ART treatment, comparing hCG or progesterone with placebo or no treatment, comparing progesterone with hCG, progesterone plus hCG, or progesterone plus estrogen, or comparing different routes of progesterone administration. Quasi-randomized trials were excluded from the main analyses, but included in a secondary analysis for each comparison.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

For each comparison, data on live birth, ongoing and clinical pregnancy per embryo or gamete transfer procedure, miscarriage per clinical pregnancy, ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) per transfer, and multiple pregnancy per clinical pregnancy were extracted into 2 x 2 tables and subgrouped by use of GnRHa in the ovarian stimulation regimen. The odds ratio (OR) and risk difference (RD) were calculated.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-nine studies were included in the review. Luteal phase support with hCG provided significant benefit, compared to placebo or no treatment, in terms of increased ongoing pregnancy rates (odds ratio (OR) 2.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.32 to 4.29) and decreased miscarriage rates (OR 0.12, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.50), but only when GnRHa was used. The odds of OHSS increased 20-fold when hCG was used in cycles with GnRHa. Progesterone use resulted in a small but significant increase in pregnancy rates (OR 1.34, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.79) when trials with and without GnRHa were grouped together, but no effect on the miscarriage rate was observed. No significant difference was found between progesterone and hCG or between progesterone and progesterone plus hCG or estrogen in terms of pregnancy or miscarriage rates, but the odds of OHSS were more than 2-fold higher with treatments involving hCG than with progesterone alone(OR 3.06, 95% CI 1.59 to 5.86). Comparing routes of progesterone administration, reductions in clinical pregnancy rate with the oral route, compared to the intramuscular or vaginal routes, did not reach statistical significance, but there was evidence of benefit of the intramuscular over the vaginal route for the outcomes of ongoing pregnancy and live birth. No significant difference in pregnancy rate was observed between vaginal progesterone gel and other types of vaginal progesterone.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Luteal phase support with hCG or progesterone after assisted reproduction results in an increased pregnancy rate. hCG does not provide better results than progesterone, and is associated with a greater risk of OHSS when used with GnRHa. The optimal route of progesterone administration has not yet been established.

Luteal supplementation in in vitro fertilization: more questions than answers

OBJECTIVE

To update clinicians on different regimens of luteal phase supplementation in IVF-stimulated cycles and to identify areas that need further research in this subject.

DESIGN

Literature review and critical analysis of published studies on luteal phase supplementation during the last 20 years.

CONCLUSION(S)

Luteal phase supplementation in IVF-stimulated cycles, both in gonadotropin releasing hormone agonist and antagonist protocols, is considered an essential requirement for optimal success rates. The date of initiation and discontinuation of supplemented hormones is not adequately studied in the literature. In most major controlled and randomized studies, there are no significant differences in success rates with progesterone supplementation alone, progesterone and estradiol, progesterone and human chorionic gonadotropin, and human chorionic gonadotropin alone. Success rates seem similar with intramuscular and vaginal progesterone administration with patient preference for the vaginal route. The optimal dose of progesterone has not been studied in a scientific way in the literature. The use of gonadotropin releasing hormone agonists for luteal phase supplementation in antagonist cycles appears to be promising, and is worthy of further investigation.

Luteal estrogen supplementation in stimulated cycles may improve the pregnancy rate in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection-embryo transfer

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of estradiol addition to progesterone supplementation during the luteal phase on pregnancy and implantation rates in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection-embryo transfer (IVF/ICSI-ET) cycles.

METHODS

In this prospective, randomized study, carried out in an IVF unit of a university hospital, we studied patients who were undergoing IVF/ICSI with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation using a gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist/human recombinant gonadotropin long protocol. The main outcome measures were the pregnancy and implantation rates measured in the two groups.

RESULTS

Our results suggest higher pregnancy and implantation rates in IVF/ICSI-ET cycles that were supplemented with estradiol in the luteal phase.

CONCLUSIONS

Estradiol supplementation during the luteal phase in women undergoing IVF/ICSI-ET has a beneficial effect on the outcome without (at least, as seems from this study) having any adverse effects.

Embryo freezing for preventing ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome

BACKGROUND

Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) is an iatrogenic potentially life threatening condition resulting from an excessive ovarian stimulation. Its reported incidence varies from one percent to ten percent of in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles. The factors leading to this syndrome have not been completely explained. It seems likely that the release of vasoactive substances, secreted by the ovaries under human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) stimulation plays a key role in triggering this syndrome. The hallmark of this condition, is a massive shift of fluid from the intra-vascular compartment to the third space resulting in profound intra-vascular depletion and haemoconcentration.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate (i) the effectiveness of cryopreservation (embryo freezing) for the prevention of OHSS when compared with human intra-venous albumin infusion (ii) the effectiveness of the elective cryopreservation (embryo freezing ) of all embryos for the prevention of OHSS when compared with fresh embryo transfer.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Review Group specialised register of controlled trials up to April 2007. In addition, MEDLINE (PUBMED 1985 to March 2007), EMBASE (1985 to April 2007), CINAHL (1985 to March 2007) and the National Research Register (April 2007) were searched.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in which either human intra-venous albumin or cryopreservation of all embryos were used as a therapeutic approach to OHSS were included. The women were women of reproductive age who were down regulated by gonadotrophin-releasing hormone-analogue (GnRH-a), undergoing superovulation in in vitro fertilization and or intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF and or ICSI) cycles.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors, Mr N.N. Amso (NNA) and Dr A. D'Angelo (ADA) scanned the titles and the abstracts of the reports identified by electronic searching in order to find relevant papers. One reviewer (ADA) obtained copies of the full text articles and made copies for the other reviewer (NNA) in which details of authors, institution, results and discussion were removed in order to assess their eligibility for inclusion . Disagreements were resolved by discussion. Additional information on the trial methodology or data were requested by writing to the corresponding authors directly. The interventions compared were cryopreservation (embryo freezing) versus intra-venous human albumin administration and elective cryopreservation of all embryos versus fresh embryo transfer. The primary outcomes were: incidence of moderate and severe OHSS versus nil and or mild OHSS, clinical pregnancies and or woman. The secondary outcomes were: number of oocytes retrieved, number of oocytes fertilized, number of embryos transferred, number of embryos frozen, multiple pregnancy rate, live birth rate, number of women admitted to the hospital as inpatient or outpatient and time to the next menstrual period (resolution time). Statistical analysis was performed in accordance with the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group guidelines.

MAIN RESULTS

No new studies were identified for inclusion in the update therefore the of seventeen studies originally identified in the review published issue 2, 2002. It therefore remains that two studies of which met our inclusion criteria one study was included where cryopreservation (embryo freezing) was compared with intra-venous human albumin administration (Shaker 1996) and one study was included where elective cryopreservation of all embryos was compared with fresh embryo transfer (Ferraretti 1999). When cryopreservation was compared with intra-venous human albumin administration no difference was found in all the outcomes examined between the two groups. When elective cryopreservation of all embryos was compared with fresh embryo transfer no difference was found in all the outcomes examined between the two groups.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This updated of the review (D'Angelo 2002) has showed that there is insufficient evidence to support routine cryopreservation and insufficient evidence for the relative merits of intra-venous albumin versus cryopreservation.

An update of luteal phase support in stimulated IVF cycles

Stimulated IVF cycles are associated with luteal phase defect. In order to overcome this, different doses, durations and types of luteal phase support (LPS) have been evaluated. There is still no agreement regarding the optimal supplementation scheme. The aim of this paper is to assess the past and the current clinical practices of luteal supplementation in IVF. The databases of Medline and PubMed were searched to identify relevant publications. LPS with human chorionic gonadotrophin (hCG) [n=262, odds ratio (OR) 2.72 (95%), confidence interval (CI) 1.56-4.90, P<0.05] or progesterone (n=260, OR 1.57 CI 1.13, 2.17, P<0.05) results in an increased pregnancy rate compared with placebo, however, hCG is associated with increased risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. Natural micronized progesterone is not efficient if taken orally. The data on oral dydrogesterone are still conflicting. Vaginal and intra muscular progesterone have comparable outcomes. The addition of estradiol (E2) seems to be beneficial in long GnRH agonist protocol (implantation rate 39.6% with E2 compared with no E2; P<0.05) but not in the short GnRH agonist and GnRH antagonist protocol. Despite the early promising results, it is too early to recommend the use of GnRH agonist in LPS. LPS should cease on the day of positive HCG. Since the cause of luteal phase defect in IVF appears to be related to the supraphysiological levels of steroids, milder stimulation protocols should be advocated in order to eventually overcome the luteal phase defect.

Progesterone supplementation to prevent recurrent miscarriage and to reduce implantation failure in assisted reproduction cycles

Implantation failure has been questioned for many cases of recurrent miscarriage and unsuccessful assisted reproduction. The exact cause of implantation failure is not known, but luteal phase defect is encountered in many of these cases. Consequently, women with recurrent miscarriages have been treated with progesterone supplementation with various degrees of success, and a recent meta-analysis has shown trends for improved live birth rates in those women. Progesterone probably acts as an immunological suppressant blocking T-helper (Th)1 activity and inducing release of Th2 cytokines. Numerous studies have confirmed that ovarian stimulation used in assisted reproduction is associated with luteal phase insufficiency, even when gonadotrophin-releasing hormone antagonists are used. In those patients, advanced endometrial histological maturity and a decrease in the concentration of cytoplasmic progesterone receptors are observed. Progesterone supplementation results in a trend towards improved ongoing and clinical pregnancy rates, except in patients treated with human menopausal gonadotrophin-only regimens, in whom ongoing pregnancy rates increase significantly. More randomized controlled trials are needed to increase the power of the currently available meta-analyses to further evaluate progesterone supplementation in both conditions.

Luteal Phase Support in in vitro Fertilization: Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

OBJECTIVE

To determine if luteal phase support improves the pregnancy rate in in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles.

DESIGN

A meta-analysis of randomized trials of luteal phase support was carried out with the main outcome measure being the pregnancy rate per cycle.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine trials were evaluated. Eighteen trials met the inclusion criteria. Five main themes were identified: human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) versus progesterone; progesterone versus progesterone and hCG; progesterone versus placebo; hCG versus placebo, and hCG versus progesterone versus no support.

CONCLUSION

Luteal phase support is definitely indicated in IVF treatment cycles. This meta-analysis favored hCG above progesterone as luteal phase support with respect to pregnancy rates. Further prospective randomized trials are needed to determine a definite consensus with respect to the duration of luteal phase support in IVF cycles.

Luteal phase support in assisted reproductive technology

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The purpose of this review is to discuss luteal support in assisted reproduction and to provide an evidence-based overview of the current options available.

RECENT FINDINGS

The luteal phase has been found to be defective in virtually all of the stimulation protocols used for in-vitro fertilization. Common mechanisms such as supraphysiological levels of estradiol, decreased output of luteinizing hormone, inhibition of the corpus luteum and asynchronization of estradiol and progesterone may be involved in insufficient function of the corpus luteum in assisted reproductive technology.

SUMMARY

Gonadotropin releasing hormone agonist undoubtedly provides benefits in stimulated cycles, however it also has adverse effects, inhibition of the corpus luteum together with supraphysiological hormonal profiles finally leading to luteal phase defects. Luteal phase support with human chorionic gonadotropin or progesterone after assisted reproduction results in increased pregnancy rates. The role of luteal phase support in these cycles has also been recently elucidated. Use of human chorionic gonadotropin for luteal phase support is associated with a marked increase in the risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome, therefore progesterone is the preferred choice. Data on the benefits of estrogen supplementation are conflicting. Among the routes of progesterone administration, reductions in pregnancy rates are noted on oral administration. In spite of a lack of statistical significance, the intramuscular route seems to be more beneficial than the vaginal route when considering rates of ongoing pregnancy and live birth. Further clarification is needed on the ideal dose, the optimal route and the duration of progesterone administration in assisted reproduction.

Greater implantation and pregnancy rates with vaginal progesterone in intracytoplasmic sperm injection but not in in vitro fertilization cycles: a retrospective study

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effectiveness of vaginal progesterone supplementation with intramuscular supplementation in assisted reproduction cycles.

DESIGN

Retrospective study.

SETTING

Physiopathology of Human Reproduction Unit, Pordenone, Italy, from July 2000 to June 2004.

PATIENT(S)

Three hundred and eight-five intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) procedures (188 with vaginal gel and 197 with intramuscular progesterone) and 373 in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles (227 with vaginal and 146 with intramuscular progesterone).

INTERVENTION(S)

Progesterone luteal supplementation: vaginal gel (Crinone 8% 90 mg/day) or intramuscular (Prontogest 50 mg/day).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Implantation rates, and total and clinical pregnancy rates.

RESULT(S)

Higher rates of implantation and total and clinical pregnancies were observed in the vaginal supplemented ICSI subgroup than in the intramuscular one. This difference was observed for all transfers (13.3% vs. 8.8%, 39.8% vs. 23.3%, and 28.7% vs. 18.6%) and for ultrasound-guided transfers (17.2% vs. 9.3%, 49% vs. 27%, and 36.9% vs. 21.1%, respectively).

CONCLUSION(S)

The vaginal route of luteal supplementation may be better than the intramuscular one, yielding higher implantation rates as well as total and clinical pregnancy rates in ICSI cycles but not in classic IVF treatments.

The Evolution of in Vitro Fertilization: Integration of Pharmacology, Technology, and Clinical Care

For the couple having trouble achieving pregnancy, the options and opportunities for assistance have never been brighter. Options such as controlled ovarian hyperstimulation, in vitro fertilization, and intracytoplasmic sperm injection have been developed over the past five decades and provide hope for couples that previously would have been considered infertile. In vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection represent a coalescence of advances in physiology, endocrinology, pharmacology, technology, and clinical care. In vitro fertilization has assisted well over one million couples in their efforts to start or build a family, and the demand for such services continues to increase. The purpose of this manuscript is to review the pharmacological advances that made controlled ovarian hyperstimulation, and therefore in vitro fertilization and intracytoplasmic sperm injection, possible. We will discuss the early stages of gonadotropin use to stimulate ovarian production of multiple mature eggs, the advances in recombinant technology that allowed purified hormone for therapy, and the use of other hormones to regulate the menstrual cycle such that the likelihood of successful oocyte retrieval and embryo implantation is optimized. Finally, we will review current areas that require particular attention if we are to provide more opportunity for infertile couples.

Luteal phase defect: myth or reality

Although the diagnosis of luteal phase defect (LPD) has been described convincingly in the research setting, it remains a controversial clinical entity. Apart from many uncertainties that surround the diagnosis of LPD, there is no convincing evidence that LPD is associated with infertility and recurrent abortion. Once diagnosed, the treatment options are empiric and include those that are recommended for unexplained infertility. The efforts to diagnose LPD in patients who have infertility or recurrent abortion are not justified.

Comparison of Pregnancy Outcomes of Progesterone or Progesterone + Estradiol for Luteal Phase Support in ICSI-ET Cycles

OBJECTIVE

To find out the effect of estradiol with progesterone for luteal phase support in IVF-ICSI cycles.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Patients were accepted for treatment in the ART unit of Selcuk University, Meram Faculty of Medicine, between January 2001 and March 2003. The study was done in a prospective manner. The age range of 252 women was 19-41 years and the total number of cycles was 310. All patients were treated with a long ovulation induction protocol. Patients were treated and divided into two groups in a randomized manner: group I used only 600 mg/day divided into three equal doses of micronized progesterone vaginally, and group II used transdermal estradiol 100 microg/day + 600 mg/day vaginal micronized progesterone.

RESULTS

310 ICSI cycles were carried out in 252 infertile couples between January 2001 and March 2003. From 22 of these cycles, oocytes were retrieved but no embryos were developed. In the remaining 288 cycles there were embryo transfers. All embryo development was achieved by ICSI treatment. In 148 out of 288 cycles, the luteal phase was supported only by vaginal micronized progesterone (group I). On the other hand, the remaining 140 cycles received vaginal micronized progesterone plus transdermal estradiol 100 microg/day (group II). The number of beta-hCG-positive results in group I and group II were 20 (13.5 %) and 54 (38.5%) respectively.

CONCLUSION

Adding estradiol to progesterone for luteal phase support in ICSI-ET cycles may increase implantation and pregnancy rates.

High local endometrial effect of vaginal progesterone gel

Our objective was to investigate the first-pass effect to the uterus of progesterone gel administered vaginally. This was a prospective, randomized study of 32 postmenopausal women, attending our menopause clinic. All women used transdermal estradiol (50 microg/day, a patch each week) for 2 weeks. They used either vaginal progesterone gel or intramuscular progesterone in oil 50 mg after 24 h to oppose the transdermal estradiol. Serum progesterone levels and endometrial tissue progesterone levels were determined. Serum progesterone levels were higher in women who used the intramuscular rather than the vaginal route. Although serum progesterone levels in the vaginal group were lower than in the intramuscular group, the endometrial tissue concentration of progesterone was higher. It is concluded that progesterone gel, used vaginally, has a high local effect on the endometrium, without any systemic side-effects due to high plasma progesterone levels.

Luteal phase support in assisted reproduction cycles

BACKGROUND

The aspiration of the granulosa cells that surround the oocyte and the use of gonadotropin releasing hormone agonists (GnRHa) during assisted reproduction technology (ART) treatment can interfere with the production, during the luteal phase, of progesterone, which is necessary for successful implantation of the embryo. Providing hormonal supplementation during the luteal phase with either progesterone itself, or human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG), which stimulates progesterone production, may improve implantation and, thus, pregnancy rates.

OBJECTIVES

To determine (1) if luteal phase support after assisted reproduction increases the pregnancy rate, (2) the optimal hormone for luteal phase support, i.e. hCG, progesterone, or a combination of both, and (3) the optimal route of progesterone administration.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders & Subfertility Group trials register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (1971 to Dec 2003), EMBASE (1985 to Dec 2003). We handsearched reference lists of relevant articles were scanned, and abstract books from scientific meetings up to December 2003.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized controlled trials of luteal phase support after ART treatment, comparing hCG or progesterone with placebo or no treatment, comparing progesterone with hCG, progesterone plus hCG, or progesterone plus estrogen, or comparing different routes of progesterone administration. Quasi-randomized trials were excluded from the main analyses, but included in a secondary analysis for each comparison.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

For each comparison, data on live birth, ongoing and clinical pregnancy per embryo or gamete transfer procedure, miscarriage per clinical pregnancy, ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) per transfer, and multiple pregnancy per clinical pregnancy were extracted into 2 x 2 tables and subgrouped by use of GnRHa in the ovarian stimulation regimen. The odds ratio (OR) and risk difference (RD) were calculated.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-nine studies were included in the review. Luteal phase support with hCG provided significant benefit, compared to placebo or no treatment, in terms of increased ongoing pregnancy rates (odds ratio (OR) 2.38, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.32 to 4.29) and decreased miscarriage rates (OR 0.12, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.50), but only when GnRHa was used. The odds of OHSS increased 20-fold when hCG was used in cycles with GnRHa. Progesterone use resulted in a small but significant increase in pregnancy rates (OR 1.34, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.79) when trials with and without GnRHa were grouped together, but no effect on the miscarriage rate was observed. No significant difference was found between progesterone and hCG or between progesterone and progesterone plus hCG or estrogen in terms of pregnancy or miscarriage rates, but the odds of OHSS were more than 2-fold higher with treatments involving hCG than with progesterone alone(OR 3.06, 95% CI 1.59 to 5.86). Comparing routes of progesterone administration, reductions in clinical pregnancy rate with the oral route, compared to the intramuscular or vaginal routes, did not reach statistical significance, but there was evidence of benefit of the intramuscular over the vaginal route for the outcomes of ongoing pregnancy and live birth. No significant difference in pregnancy rate was observed between vaginal progesterone gel and other types of vaginal progesterone.

REVIEWERS' CONCLUSIONS

Luteal phase support with hCG or progesterone after assisted reproduction results in an increased pregnancy rate. hCG does not provide better results than progesterone, and is associated with a greater risk of OHSS when used with GnRHa. The optimal route of progesterone administration has not yet been established.

A randomised comparison of side effects and patient inconvenience of two vaginal progesterone formulations used for luteal support in in vitro fertilisation cycles

OBJECTIVE

To compare side effects and patient inconvenience of two vaginal progesterone (P) formulations for luteal support in in vitro fertilisation cycles.

STUDY DESIGN

Sixty infertile patients at risk of developing ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome were randomised to receive either Cyclogest vaginal suppositories 400mg twice daily or Crinone 8% vaginal gel once daily for 14 days as the luteal support. On Day 6 and Day 16 after embryo transfer, they rated side effects and patient inconvenience into four grades: none, mild, moderate and severe by completing a questionnaire.

RESULTS

Perineal irritation was reported by about 20% of patients in each group. Significantly more patients using Cyclogest suppositories graded inconvenience of administration, leaking out and interference with coitus as moderate or severe.

CONCLUSION

There was no difference in perineal irritation after Cyclogest suppositories or Crinone 8% gel although significantly more patients found inconvenience of administration, leaking out and interference with coitus after Cyclogest.

Bleeding patterns in women using intramuscular progesterone for luteal support in in-vitro fertilisation cycles

This paper aims to evaluate the effects of i.m. progesterone on bleeding patterns after in-vitro fertilisation embryo transfer (IVF-ET). It is a retrospective cohort study conducted in the reproductive endocrinology and IVF department of a teaching hospital. One hundred consecutive women were studied who had undergone IVF-ET using 'long protocol' stimulation with leuprolide acetate-recombinant follicle stimulating hormone (rFSH) and who did not become pregnant. Intramuscular (i.m.) progesterone (50mg once daily) was started the day before oocyte retrieval and continued for a minimum of 12-14 days following embryo transfer. The main outcome measures were time interval between oocyte retrieval and onset of bleeding, luteal phase serum progesterone and oestradiol (E2) levels, and midluteal endometrial thickness. Of the 100 patients whose charts were reviewed, 67 bled (group A) before progesterone treatment was discontinued (17 days after oocyte retrieval) and 33 (group B) bled after progesterone treatment was discontinued (> 17 days). Mean onset of bleeding was 16.2+/-2.6 days after oocyte retrieval. Serum progesterone concentrations were similar in the two groups on the day of hCG administration, whereas progesterone concentrations (in-group B) were higher on days 7 and 15 after oocyte retrieval. No statistically significant differences were found between two groups with respect to mean midluteal endometrial thickness and mean serum E2 concentrations on days 0, 7 and 15. The results suggest that i.m progesterone administration for luteal support in assisted reproduction cycles elongates luteal phase in some patients due to supraphysiological serum progesterone levels. However, most patients start to bleed in the absence of pregnancy despite continued progesterone treatment.

Luteal support with vaginal micronized progesterone gel in assisted reproduction

The purpose of this study was to review the rationale for vaginal progesterone treatment as luteal support in IVF, and the clinical experience with vaginal micronized progesterone gel. It was found that luteal support with exogenous progesterone significantly improves implantation and pregnancy rates after IVF. Vaginal administration offers a number of potential advantages over intramuscular injection in terms of tolerability and convenience. The clinical experience with Crinone 8%, a vaginal gel containing 90 mg micronized progesterone in a polycarbophil base, indicates that the use of this preparation is associated with pregnancy rates comparable with those achieved after intramuscular administration of progesterone. Moreover, in studies in which patient preferences have been assessed, significantly higher preferences for vaginal micronized progesterone gel have been reported, compared with intramuscular administration or vaginal suppositories. In conclusion, the vaginal micronized progesterone gel used in this study provided effective and well-tolerated luteal support in women undergoing IVF.

Luteal phase support

Assisted reproductive techniques have become a routine treatment for infertility. The extended use of gonadotrophin-releasing hormone analogues in assisted reproductive techniques has made luteal phase support mandatory, as it has been clearly demonstrated that they alter luteal LH pulsatility. For luteal support, HCG administration, though effective, has a high risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. Progesterone continues to be the gold standard for supplementation. Vaginal progesterone represents a highly effective alternative to painful intramuscular injections. The vaginal route is mainly characterized by direct delivery of the progesterone to the endometrium, thus producing high levels at the target tissue and a very low incidence of side effects.

Embryo freezing for preventing ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome: a Cochrane review

This paper is based on a Cochrane review published in The Cochrane Library, issue 3, 2002 (see www.CochraneLibrary.net for information) with permission from The Cochrane Collaboration and Update Software. Cochrane reviews are regularly updated as new evidence emerges and in response to comments and criticisms, and The Cochrane Library should be consulted for the most recent version of the review.

BACKGROUND

Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) is an iatrogenic condition resulting from an excessive ovarian response to superovulation medication. The objective of this review was to evaluate the effectiveness of cryopreservation (embryo freezing) when compared with human i.v. albumin infusion and with fresh embryo transfer for the prevention of OHSS.

METHODS

This was based on a Cochrane Review. Randomized controlled trials in which either human i.v. albumin or cryopreservation of all embryos was used as a therapeutic approach to OHSS were included. The participants were women down-regulated by GnRH agonist, undergoing superovulation in IVF/ICSI cycles. The interventions compared were cryopreservation versus i.v. human albumin administration and elective cryopreservation of all embryos versus fresh embryo transfer. The primary outcomes were: incidence of moderate and severe OHSS versus nil/mild OHSS, and clinical pregnancies/woman. Statistical analysis was performed in accordance with the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group guidelines.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies were identified, two of which met our inclusion criteria. One study was included where cryopreservation was compared with i.v. human albumin administration and another where elective cryopreservation of all embryos was compared with fresh embryo transfer. In both interventions no difference was found in all the outcomes examined between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

This review has shown that there is insufficient evidence to support routine cryopreservation and insufficient evidence for the relative merits of i.v. albumin versus cryopreservation.

Luteal phase support using either Crinone 8% or Utrogest: results of a prospective, randomized study

The Crinone 8% preparation makes it possible to administer natural progesterone (90 mg) vaginally once daily for luteal phase support (LPS). Until now, no prospective, randomized studies have directly compared this new preparation with widely used Utrogest capsules, which were originally designed for oral administration but are used routinely as a vaginal preparation. A prospective, randomized study investigated 126 patients undergoing cycles of in vitro fertilization (IVF) and IVF/intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI). Patients received either Crinone 8% (n = 73) vaginally once daily or two Utrogest capsules (n=53) vaginally three times daily (600 mg). Clinical pregnancy rates were comparable (28.8 versus 18.9%), as were clinical abortion rates until 12 weeks of gestation (14.3 versus 10.0%) and clinical ongoing pregnancy rates (24.7 versus 17.0%) in the Crinone 8% and Utrogest groups, respectively. Forty-seven non-pregnant patients were randomly selected to answer questions regarding comfort during LPS. Crinone 8% had a clear advantage over Utrogest as it resulted in less vaginal discharge (P < 0.01) and fewer application difficulties (P<0.05). Twenty patients familiar with the alternative preparation from a previous cycle also noted that Crinone 8% was easier to apply (P < 0.01) and less time consuming (P < 0.05) to use than Utrogest.

Embryo freezing for preventing Ovarian Hyperstimulation Syndrome

BACKGROUND

Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) is an iatrogenic potentially life threatening condition resulting from an excessive ovarian stimulation. Its reported incidence varies from 1% to 10% of in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles. The factors leading to this syndrome have not been completely explained. It seems likely that the release of vasoactive substances, secreted by the ovaries under human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) stimulation plays a key role in triggering this syndrome. The hallmark of this condition, is a massive shift of fluid from the intra-vascular compartment to the third space resulting in profound intra-vascular depletion and hemoconcentration.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate (i) the effectiveness of cryopreservation (embryo freezing) for the prevention of OHSS when compared with human intra-venous albumin infusion and (ii) the effectiveness of the elective cryopreservation (embryo freezing ) of all embryos for the prevention of OHSS when compared with fresh embryo transfer.

SEARCH STRATEGY

Publications in the literature that describe or may describe randomised controlled trials of both human intra-venous albumin and freezing of all embryos in the management of OHSS as consequence of the superovulation in assisted reproduction techniques (ART) cycles were searched. The Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Review Group specialised register of controlled trials was searched. In addition, MEDLINE (PUBMED 1985 to 2001), EMBASE (1985 to 2001), CINHAL (1985 to 2001) and the National Research Register were searched

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in which either human intra-venous albumin or cryopreservation of all embryos were used as a therapeutic approach to OHSS were included. The participants were women of reproductive age who were down regulated by gonadotrophin-releasing hormone-analogue (GnRH-a), undergoing superovulation in in vitro fertilization/intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI) cycles.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two reviewers, Mr N.N. Amso (NNA) and Dr A. D'Angelo (ADA) scanned the titles and the abstracts of the reports identified by electronic searching in order to find relevant papers. One reviewer (ADA) obtained copies of the full text articles and made copies for the other reviewer (NNA) in which details of authors, institution, results and discussion were removed in order to assess their eligibility for inclusion. Then, both reviewers extracted data independently using forms designed according to Cochrane guidelines. Disagreements were resolved by discussion. Additional information on the trial methodology or data were requested by writing to the corresponding authors directly. The interventions compared were cryopreservation (embryo freezing) versus intra-venous human albumin administration and elective cryopreservation of all embryos versus fresh embryo transfer. The primary outcomes were: incidence of moderate and severe OHSS versus nil/mild OHSS, clinical pregnancies/woman. The secondary outcomes were: number of oocytes retrieved, number of oocytes fertilized, number of embryos transferred, number of embryos frozen, multiple pregnancy rate, live birth rate, number of women admitted to the hospital as inpatient or outpatient and time to the next menstrual period (resolution time). Statistical analysis was performed in accordance with the Cochrane Menstrual Disorders and Subfertility Group guidelines.

MAIN RESULTS

Seventeen studies were identified, two of which met our inclusion criteria. One study was included where cryopreservation (embryo freezing) was compared with intra-venous human albumin administration (Shaker 1996) and one study was included where elective cryopreservation of all embryos was compared with fresh embryo transfer (Ferraretti 1999). When cryopreservation was compared with intra-venous human albumin administration no difference was found in all the outcomes examined between the two groups. When elective cryopreservation of all embryos was compared with fresh embryo transfer no difference was found in all the outcomes examined between the two groups.

REVIEWER'S CONCLUSIONS

This review has showed that there is insufficient evidence to support routine cryopreservation and insufficient evidence for the relative merits of intra-venous albumin versus cryopreservation.

The questionable use of albumin for the prevention of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome in an IVF programme: a randomized placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The role of intravenous (IV) albumin administration in the prevention of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) and in the improvement of IVF conception outcomes was evaluated in a prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled double blind study.

METHODS

Ninety-eight women were enrolled in the study and were consecutively assigned to either a treatment group or a control group. Eleven patients were lost to follow-up after assignment. Of the remaining 87 women, 46 received albumin on the day of oocyte retrieval, and 41 received 0.9% sodium chloride solution as a placebo control. Outcome measures included OHSS incidence rates and pregnancy rates in the two trial groups.

RESULTS

Four of the 46 patients in the study group developed severe OHSS and six developed moderate OHSS. In the control group, one of the 41 developed severe OHSS and five developed moderate OHSS. The difference in OHSS incidence rates between the two groups was not statistically significant [relative risk (RR) = 1.49, 95% CI = 0.59-3.73]. Fourteen patients (30%) in the intervention group conceived, compared with 16 patients (39%) in the control group. The difference in conception rates between the two groups was not statistically significant (RR = 0.78, 95% CI = 0.44-1.39).

CONCLUSIONS

Albumin appears to have no positive effect on OHSS or conception rates, while its use carries the risk of undesirable side effects, including exacerbation of ascites in OHSS, nausea, vomiting, febrile reaction, allergic reaction, anaphylactic shock and risk of virus and prion transmission. We suggest that this form of treatment should not be included in the prevention of OHSS.

Combined approach as an effective method in the prevention of severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of combined approach on the prevention of severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) in high risk patients undergoing controlled ovarian hyperstimulation for IVF. The combined approach consisted of: (1) step-down administration of gonadotropins; (2) lowering the dose of human chorionic gonadotropin; (3) intravenous albumin infusion at the time of oocyte retrieval and (4) progesterone use for luteal support. Total of 87 high risk patients with a serum estradiol level >11,010 pmol/l or 3000 pg/ml on HCG day were managed by this combined approach and their results were compared with 274 low risk patients. In all high risk patients, the gonadotrophin dose were decreased starting as early as on day 4 of ovarian stimulation as necessary, ovulation was triggered by a decreased HCG dose of 5000-7000 IU according to the level of estradiol, intravenous infusion of 20% human albumin, 50-100ml were given just 1h before the oocyte retrieval and luteal support was provided either by 50mg progesterone in oil, IM or 600 mg micronized progesterone orally or vaginally until the day of beta-HCG determination. All patients were followed by serial ultrasonographic examinations and complete blood count analysis after embryo transfer to detect the early signs of OHSS and to allow early intervention. Age and duration of infertility were similar in both groups. Although the number of gonadotrophin ampoules used (22.7 +/- 4.7 versus 27.8+/-3.7; P<0.05) was significantly lower, estradiol levels (16,764 +/- 6936 pmol/l versus 8870 +/- 2456 pmol/l; P<0.05) and mean number of oocytes (18.3 +/- 5.9 versus 10.6+/-5.4; P<0.05) were significantly higher in study group. There was no significant difference between groups in terms of the mean number of transferred embryos (3.2 +/- 1.1 versus 3.4+/-1.1) and rate of pregnancies (50.5% versus 40.1%). There was only one moderate and no severe OHSS case in the high risk group, while five moderate and one severe OHSS cases developed in the control group consisting of low risk patients. In conclusion, intravenous albumin combined with low dose HCG, early step-down administration of gonadotropins and progesterone use for luteal support, so called combined approach, proved to be effective in the prevention of severe ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome in documented high risk patients.

Evaluation of an optimal luteal phase support protocol in IVF

SUBJECT

Luteal phase support has been shown in the past to be an essential part of ovarian stimulation protocols, especially the long protocol. It could be shown that hCG is as effective as is progesterone for luteal phase support but hCG is accompanied by a higher rate of complications.

METHODS

Progesterone can be administered in several routes. The oral, intramuscular (i.m.) and vaginal routes have been chosen frequently in the past. The oral route is ineffective, since progesterone has a low oral bioavailability (<10%), and a high rate of metabolites, which may result in side effects such as somnolence etc. Intramuscular administration provides very high serum levels of progesterone and this route is effective with regard to pregnancy rates. Injection of progesterone, however, is painful and cannot be done by the patient herself. The vaginal route is also effective, progesterone can be administered by the patient herself and progesterone is delivered directly to the uterus, where high levels are achieved (first uterine pass effect).

RESULTS

Several studies could show, in the past, that the vaginal administration of progesterone is effective also with regard to the downregulation of uterine contractions. Crinone 8% Vaginal Gel is especially designed for vaginal use with a special applicator and has to be administered once daily in the morning. It adheres to the vaginal epithelium, and leakage of the gel is substantially reduced as compared to other drugs like capsules or suppositories.

CONCLUSIONS

Since progesterone is as effective as hCG for luteal phase support but provides a higher safety with regard to ovarian hyperstimulation syndromes, and vaginal progesterone is as effective as intramuscular progesterone, vaginal progesterone should be the standard choice for luteal phase support. Crinone 8% seems to be the most comfortable way of vaginal administration of progesterone for luteal phase support in IVF cycles.

Human chorionic gonadotropin and intravaginal natural progesterone are equally effective for luteal phase support in IVF

This prospective randomized study compared human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) and micronized transvaginal progesterone for luteal support in 310 in vitro fertilization (IVF) patients treated with leuprolide acetate and gonadotropins in a long protocol, and showing normal ovarian response. Both treatment groups were homogeneous for age, BMI, stimulation treatment and ovarian response. Pregnancy rates per embryo transfer were not significantly different (33.1% for the hCG group versus 38.7% for the progesterone group). For IVF patients with a normal response to stimulation under pituitary suppression, the use of hCG or progesterone for luteal support does not seem to have any effect on pregnancy rate. The choice of luteal treatment must balance medical hazard and patient convenience, as both therapeutic regimens seem equally effective.

Estradiol supplementation during the luteal phase may improve the pregnancy rate in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer cycles

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the effect of adding E(2) to progestin supplementation during the luteal phase on pregnancy and implantation rates in patients undergoing IVF cycles.

DESIGN

Prospective, randomized study.

SETTING

An IVF unit in a university hospital.

PATIENT(S)

Patients who were undergoing IVF with controlled ovarian hyperstimulation using a GnRH analog and who had E(2)2,500 pg/dL at the time of hCG administration.

INTERVENTION(S)

Serum concentrations of E(2) and progesterone were measured in all patients on days 7, 10, and 12 after ET.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

The E(2) and progesterone profiles of the luteal phase and the pregnancy and implantation rates were documented. Data were analyzed for the entire study population and further stratified according to the GnRH analog protocol used (short or long).

RESULT(S)

Significantly higher E(2) levels were found during the luteal phase in the group that received E(2) supplementation. This effect was more pronounced in the patients who were treated with the long GnRH analog protocol. Significantly higher pregnancy and implantation rates were recorded in the patients who received E(2) supplementation and were treated with the long GnRH analog protocol.

CONCLUSION(S)

For patients who are treated with the long GnRH analog protocol for controlled ovarian hyperstimulation and for whom luteal support with hCG is contraindicated, the addition of E(2) to the progestin support regimen may have a beneficial effect on pregnancy and implantation rates.

Peripheral blood concentrations of inhibin B are elevated during gonadotrophin stimulation in patients who later develop ovarian OHSS and inhibin A concentrations are elevated after OHSS onset

Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) is a serious side-effect of controlled ovarian stimulation. Inhibin A and inhibin B, as putative predictors of OHSS development in the same stimulation cycle, were evaluated. A cohort of 428 in-vitro fertilization (IVF) patients was followed. Fifteen patients with severe OHSS were compared with matched (age, follicle number) controls. Serum samples were obtained at five time points from the start of ovarian stimulation until >/= 3 days post-embryo transfer and analysed with specific enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays. Inhibin A in the OHSS group showed a continuous increase with a significant elevation 3 days prior to oocyte aspiration (ASP-3) and onwards. Maximal concentrations were detected at embryo transfer and the concentrations remained high at >/= 3 days post-embryo transfer. Inhibin A concentrations in the control group showed a transient elevation (significant increase at ASP and embryo transfer). Inhibin A in the OHSS group was significantly higher than in controls only at the time point where OHSS had developed (>/= 3 days post-embryo transfer), and declined during OHSS treatment. Overall, there was a positive correlation between the number of follicles and inhibin A concentrations at ASP-3 until embryo transfer in the control group but not in the OHSS group. The concentrations of inhibin B in both groups increased from the start of ovarian stimulation, with peak values at ASP-3, and then a decline. Inhibin B was significantly higher in OHSS patients at ASP-3 and at ASP. Inhibin B at ASP-3 was correlated with the total number of follicles in both the OHSS group and the control group.

Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome

Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome is an iatrogenic complication of assisted reproduction. In its most severe form, it is potentially fatal. The major clinical components are marked ovarian enlargement and increased capillary permeability leading to ascites, hydrothorax and pericardial effusion. Severe cases are associated with thromboembolic phenomena, respiratory distress and renal failure. The definitive pathophysiology is unknown. The available evidence would support a central role for inflammatory cytokines and angiogenic growth factors. Ultrasound examination and serum oestradiol values are currently used to predict patients at risk. The ideal treatment is prevention, but there has been only limited success. The main aims of treatment are to correct fluid imbalance, maintain renal perfusion and support the patient until the condition resolves. Drug therapy has a limited role, although anticytokine agents may prove useful.

Serum vascular endothelial growth factor levels before starting gonadotropin treatment in women who have developed moderate forms of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome

The study aims to evaluate whether serum vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) levels, before treatment with gonadotropins, may be considered a predictive marker of moderate ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS). At the University of Pisa hospital infertility unit we have retrospectively selected 10 patients who developed moderate forms of OHSS and 30 control patients who presented a normal response to ovarian stimulation among 400 women undergoing in vitro fertilization (IVF). Serum samples were collected before starting pFSH administration (150-300 IU/day). VEGF levels in serum were measured. No statistically significant difference was found between the serum VEGF levels of patients who developed moderate forms of OHSS and women without any symptoms of the syndrome. Further, serum VEGF concentrations were not significantly correlated with the age of the patients, the number of international units of FSH administered during the cycle of stimulation, the follicle and oocyte numbers counted on the day of the egg retrieval or estradiol levels detected on the same day. This study demonstrates that serum VEGF levels, before starting gonadotropin treatment, are not predictive of the subsequent development of moderate forms of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome.

Elective cryopreservation of all pronucleate embryos in women at risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome: efficiency and safety

In a prospective randomized study, we analysed 125 patients at risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS), selected in the period between January 1996 and July 1997. All the patients had blood oestradiol concentration >/=1500 pg/ml on the day of human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG) administration and >/=15 oocytes were collected. The patients were matched in two groups: group A, control group (n = 67), had fresh embryo transfers; group B (n = 58) had cryopreservation of all obtained pronucleate embryos. Pregnancy, live birth rates and the incidence of OHSS were compared between the two groups. There were no significant differences in terms of pregnancies per patient (46.3 versus 48.3%) and live birth rates (38. 8 versus 39.6%). No cases of OHSS occurred in group B, while four patients developed the syndrome in group A. The implantation rate was slightly but not significantly lower in group B (chi2 = 1.03). These results suggest that elective cryopreservation of all zygotes might prevent the risk of OHSS in patients undergoing IVF treatment. In contrast to what has been reported by other authors, our results show that the elective cryopreservation of zygotes does not affect pregnancy and live birth rates.

Administration of progesterone before oocyte retrieval negatively affects the implantation rate

OBJECTIVE

To compare the efficacy of two clinically accepted methods of progesterone supplementation during IVF.

DESIGN

Prospective randomized trial.

SETTING

A university-based IVF program.

PATIENT(S)

Three hundred fourteen stimulated IVF cycles between January 1993 and October 1994.

INTERVENTION(S)

Patients were assigned to one of two luteal phase progesterone regimens by a random permuted block design. In protocol A, 12.5 mg of IM progesterone was given 12 hours before oocyte retrieval; in protocol B, 25 mg of IM progesterone was given on the day of oocyte retrieval.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

Clinical pregnancy.

RESULT(S)

Patient demographic characteristics, including age, diagnosis, number of oocytes retrieved and fertilized, and number of embryos transferred, were not different between the two groups. There was no difference in the rate of cycle cancellation between the groups. One hundred forty ETs were performed in patients assigned to protocol A and 142 in patients assigned to protocol B. The clinical pregnancy rate in group A was 12.9% compared with 24.6% in group B.

CONCLUSION(S)

The administration of progesterone before oocyte retrieval is associated with a lower pregnancy rate than the administration of progesterone after oocyte retrieval.

Changes in vascular endothelial growth factor levels and the risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome in women enrolled in an in vitro fertilization program

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate plasma and follicular fluid levels of vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) in women undergoing controlled ovarian hyperstimulation to establish the possible role of this growth factor as a predictive marker of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS).

DESIGN

Prospective observational study.

SETTING

University hospital infertility unit.

PATIENT(S)

Fifteen women at risk of OHSS and 15 controls.

INTERVENTION(S)

An IM injection of hCG was administered; plasma and follicular fluid samples were collected 34-38 hours after administration of hCG.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S)

VEGF levels in plasma and in follicular fluid.

RESULT(S)

VEGF levels increased after hCG administration in the patients at risk of developing OHSS and in those who developed OHSS. Further, on the day of the oocyte retrieval the increase in the VEGF levels in the plasma of the patients who developed OHSS was statistically significant compared with the increase in the levels in the women who did not. On the same day, the levels of VEGF in follicular fluid were 10 times greater than those in plasma.

CONCLUSION(S)

Plasma levels of VEGF peak after hCG administration and are related to the risk of developing OHSS.

Human chorionic gonadotropin: pharmacokinetics of subcutaneous administration

The objective of the present study was to evaluate the pharmacokinetics of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) following different regimens of subcutaneous and intramuscular single-dose administration. Two hypogonadotropic hypogonadal volunteers received hCG injections without prior ovarian stimulation. The regimens included a single dose of 10,000 IU hCG either subcutaneously or intramuscularly, or 5000 IU hCG intramuscularly. Serum beta-hCG concentrations were measured periodically up to 13 days after hCG administration. Each of the three regimens exhibit a similar pharmacokinetic profile and the highest serum beta-hCG concentrations were achieved with a dose of 10,000 IU administered subcutaneously. Seven days after hCG administration beta-hCG was detectable only after subcutaneous or intramuscular administration of 10,000 IU, but not after a single intramuscular injection of 5000 IU. From the preliminary results of the study it is suggested that a single intramuscular dose of 5000 IU hCG might be sufficient to trigger ovulation, but for luteal-phase support a higher dose may be needed. Subcutaneous administration of hCG for the induction of ovulation or luteal-phase support in gonadotropin-induced cycles is feasible and might offer a better tolerance and cost-effectiveness of infertility treatments, leading to their further simplification.