Progesterone vaginal ring versus vaginal gel for luteal support with in vitro fertilization: a randomized comparative study

被引:22
|
作者
Stadtmauer, Laurel [1 ]
Silverberg, Kaylen M. [2 ]
Ginsburg, Elizabeth S. [3 ]
Weiss, Herman [4 ]
Howard, Brandon [5 ]
机构
[1] Jones Inst Reprod Med, Norfolk, VA 23507 USA
[2] Texas Fertil Ctr, Austin, TX USA
[3] Brigham & Womens Hosp, Ctr Reprod Med, Boston, MA 02115 USA
[4] Teva Womens Hlth, Petah Tiqwa, Israel
[5] Teva Womens Hlth, Frazer, PA USA
关键词
Progesterone; luteal phase support; in vitro fertilization; progesterone supplementation; assisted reproductive technology; vaginal ring; pregnancy; ASSISTED REPRODUCTIVE TECHNOLOGY; PHASE SUPPORT; INTRAMUSCULAR PROGESTERONE; CRINONE; 8-PERCENT; EMBRYO TRANSFER; IVF; METAANALYSIS; EFFICACY; OBESITY; OOCYTE;
D O I
10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.12.052
中图分类号
R71 [妇产科学];
学科分类号
100211 ;
摘要
Objective: To compare the efficacy and safety of luteal phase support in IVF with a progesterone (P) vaginal ring or gel (VR or VG). Design: Prospective, randomized, single-blind, multicenter, phase III clinical trial (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT00615251). Setting: Nineteen private and three academic high-volume U.S. IVF centers. Patient(s): One thousand two hundred ninety-seven infertile patients were randomized to a weekly P VR (n = 646) or a daily P 8% VG (n = 651). Intervention(s): IVF was performed per site-specific protocols. The day after egg retrieval, patients were randomized and began VR or VG therapy, which continued for up to 10 weeks' gestation. Main Outcome Measure(s): Clinical pregnancy rates at 8 and 12 weeks of pregnancy; rates of biochemical pregnancy, live birth, spontaneous abortion, ectopic pregnancy, and cycle cancellation; and safety and tolerability were secondary measures. Result(s): Clinical pregnancy rates at 8 and 12 weeks were high and comparable between groups: 48.0% for VR and 47.2% for VG at week 8 and 46.4% (VR) and 45.2% (VG) at week 12. Live-birth rates were 45% (VR) and 43% (VG). Adverse event profiles were similar between groups. Conclusion(s): The weekly P VR provided similar pregnancy rates to the daily VG, with no major differences in safety. ((c) 2013 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.)
引用
收藏
页码:1543 / 1549
页数:7
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Subcutaneous progesterone versus vaginal progesterone gel for luteal phase support in in vitro fertilization: a noninferiority randomized controlled study
    Lockwood, Gillian
    Griesinger, Georg
    Cometti, Barbara
    FERTILITY AND STERILITY, 2014, 101 (01) : 112 - +
  • [2] The progesterone vaginal ring as a luteal phase support in in vitro fertilization
    Vargas-Tominaga, Luis
    Medina, Andrea
    Vargas, Andrea
    Gomez, Maritza
    Huillca, Flor
    Vargas, Patricia
    REVISTA PERUANA DE GINECOLOGIA Y OBSTETRICIA, 2022, 68 (04):
  • [3] Patient experience in a randomized trial of a weekly progesterone vaginal ring versus a daily progesterone gel for luteal support after in vitro fertilization
    Ginsburg, Elizabeth S.
    Jellerette-Nolan, Teru
    Daftary, Gaurang
    Du, Yunling
    Silverberg, Kaylen M.
    FERTILITY AND STERILITY, 2018, 110 (06) : 1101 - +
  • [4] Number of Embryos Transferred and Multiple Pregnancy Rates in a Randomized Study of Progesterone Vaginal Ring Versus Gel for Luteal Support following In Vitro Fertilization.
    Schnell, V.
    Howard, B.
    Weiss, H.
    FERTILITY AND STERILITY, 2013, 99 (03) : S36 - S37
  • [5] Use of Crinone* vaginal progesterone gel for luteal support in in vitro fertilization cycles
    Chantilis, SJ
    Zeitoun, KM
    Patel, SI
    Johns, DA
    Madziar, VA
    McIntire, DD
    FERTILITY AND STERILITY, 1999, 72 (05) : 823 - 829
  • [6] Intramascular versus vaginal progesterone for luteal support in cycles of in-vitro fertilization
    Marianowski, P
    Radwanska, E
    HUMAN REPRODUCTION, 1999, 14 : 363 - 363
  • [7] A prospective randomized multicentre study comparing vaginal progesterone gel and vaginal micronized progesterone tablets for luteal support after in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection
    Bergh, Christina
    Lindenberg, Svend
    HUMAN REPRODUCTION, 2012, 27 (12) : 3467 - 3473
  • [8] Progesterone for Luteal Phase Support in In Vitro Fertilization: Comparison of Vaginal and Rectal Pessaries to Vaginal Capsules: A Randomized Controlled Study
    Khrouf, Mohamed
    Slimani, Soufiene
    Khrouf, Myriam Razgallah
    Braham, Marouen
    Bouyahia, Maha
    Berjeb, Khadija Kacem
    Chaabane, Hanene Elloumi
    Merdassi, Ghaya
    Kaffel, Aida Zahaf
    Zhioua, Amel
    Zhioua, Fethi
    CLINICAL MEDICINE INSIGHTS-WOMENS HEALTH, 2016, 9 : 43 - 47
  • [9] Progesterone Vaginal Ring for Luteal Support
    Stadtmauer L.
    Waud K.
    The Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology of India, 2015, 65 (1) : 5 - 10
  • [10] Comparison of a progesterone vaginal ring with progesterone vaginal gel for luteal phase replacement
    Stadtmauer, Laurel
    Wilkerson, Debbie
    Boyd, Jeannine
    OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY, 2008, 111 (04): : 71S - 71S