These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: A meta-analysis of the route of administration of luteal phase support in assisted reproductive technology: vaginal versus intramuscular progesterone.
    Author: Zarutskie PW, Phillips JA.
    Journal: Fertil Steril; 2009 Jul; 92(1):163-9. PubMed ID: 19362303.
    Abstract:
    OBJECTIVE: To perform an analysis of data with consideration for the current clinically accepted vaginal progesterone (P) or intramuscular (IM) P dosing regimens and the clinically relevant randomized clinical trials published during the time frame 1992 to 2008. DESIGN: Meta-analysis of progesterone luteal support in IVF cycles using odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). SETTING: Previously conducted randomized clinical trials meeting acceptance criteria. PATIENT(S): Infertility patients. INTERVENTION(S): Progesterone (50 mg) IM daily or 200 mg P-in-oil capsules three times a day vaginally or 90 mg P in bioadhesive gel daily vaginally. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Clinical pregnancy, ongoing pregnancy, miscarriage. RESULT(S): This analysis showed a comparable effect between vaginal progesterone as an oil-in-capsule or as a bioadhesive gel and IM P administration on the endpoints of clinical pregnancy (OR = 0.91, 95% [CI 0.74, 1.13]) and ongoing pregnancy (OR = 0.94, 95% [CI 0.71, 1.26]). A nominally significantly lower rate of miscarriage was observed with vaginal P compared with IM P (OR = 0.54, 95% [CI 0.29, 1.02]). CONCLUSION(S): Administration of vaginal P is comparable to administration of IM P for luteal phase support in assisted reproductive technology.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]