Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF ) Freely available
Right arrow Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (17)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Friedler, S.
Right arrow Articles by Ron-El, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Friedler, S.
Right arrow Articles by Ron-El, R.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Human Reproduction, Vol. 14, No. 8, 1944-1948, August 1999
© 1999 European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology

Luteal support with micronized progesterone following in-vitro fertilization using a down-regulation protocol with gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist: a comparative study between vaginal and oral administration

S. Friedler1, A. Raziel, M. Schachter, D. Strassburger, I. Bukovsky and R. Ron-El

IVF and Infertility Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Assaf Harofeh Medical Center, Zerifin 70300, Israel

This study aimed to compare the efficacy of micronized progesterone administered as luteal support following ovulation induction for in-vitro fertilization (IVF)– embryo transfer in cycles using gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist, either orally (200 mgx4/day) or vaginally (100 mgx2/day) and to characterize the luteal phase hormonal profile during such treatments. A total of 64 high responder patients requiring intracytoplasmic sperm injection due to male factor infertility were prospectively randomized into two treatment groups. Patients treated orally or vaginally were comparable in age (31.9 ± 6.1 versus 30.6 ± 5.2; mean ± SD), number of oocytes retrieved (17 ± 8.2 versus 18 ± 7.0), and number of embryos transferred (3.1 ± 1.2 versus 2.7 ± 0.9) per cycle. Following low dose vaginal treatment, a significantly higher implantation rate (30.7 versus 10.7%, P < 0.01), but similar clinical pregnancy rate (47.0 versus 33.3%) and ongoing pregnancy rate (41.1 versus 20.0%) was observed, compared with oral treatment. In conception cycles, luteal serum progesterone and oestrogen concentrations did not differ between the treatment groups. In non-conception cycles, late luteal progesterone concentrations were significantly lower following vaginal treatment. As low dose micronized progesterone administered vaginally is simple, easy and well tolerated, it could be recommended as the method of choice for luteal support, especially for high responder patients at risk for ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome.

Key words: luteal endocrine profile/luteal support/micronized progesterone

1 To whom correspondence should be addressed


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 NEJMHome page
E. B. Fonseca, E. Celik, M. Parra, M. Singh, K. H. Nicolaides, and the Fetal Medicine Foundation Second Trimester Scr
Progesterone and the Risk of Preterm Birth among Women with a Short Cervix
N. Engl. J. Med., August 2, 2007; 357(5): 462 - 469.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Endocr. Rev.Home page
N. S. Macklon, R. L. Stouffer, L. C. Giudice, and B. C. J. M. Fauser
The Science behind 25 Years of Ovarian Stimulation for in Vitro Fertilization
Endocr. Rev., April 1, 2006; 27(2): 170 - 207.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
E.A. Pritts and A.K. Atwood
Luteal phase support in infertility treatment: a meta-analysis of the randomized trials
Hum. Reprod., September 1, 2002; 17(9): 2287 - 2299.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
F. Zegers-Hochschild, J.P. Balmaceda, C. Fabres, V. Alam, A. Mackenna, E. Fernandez, I.M. Pacheco, M.S. Sepulveda, S. Chen, C. Borrero, et al.
Prospective randomized trial to evaluate the efficacy of a vaginal ring releasing progesterone for IVF and oocyte donation
Hum. Reprod., October 1, 2000; 15(10): 2093 - 2097.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Hum ReprodHome page
J. S. Cunha-Filho, E. Passos, S. Friedler, A. Raziel, and R.R. El
Luteal support with vaginal or oral micronized progesterone
Hum. Reprod., February 1, 2000; 15(2): 493 - 493.
[Full Text]


Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.