We have located links that may give you full text access.
Retrospective Review of Reproductive Outcomes Comparing Vaginal Progesterone to Intramuscular Progesterone as Luteal Support in Frozen Embryo Transfer Cycles.
OBJECTIVE: Recent literature suggests that progesterone in oil (PIO) is superior to vaginal progesterone (VP; Prometrium) for endometrial preparation in frozen embryo transfer cycles (FET), improving the live birth rate and reducing the rate of miscarriage. PIO has disadvantages including cost, pain, and stress of administration. The objective of this study was to evaluate whether VP is non-inferior to PIO for medicated FET cycles.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis comparing pregnancy, miscarriage, and live birth rates for PIO versus VP for medicated FET cycles, from 2017 to 2020 at a single fertility clinic. A total of 745 participants were included in the study; 438 received VP, and 307 received PIO. Univariate and multivariate binary and ordinal logistic regression analyses were performed to compare the rates of pregnancy, miscarriage, and live birth between VP and PIO.
RESULTS: Our data demonstrated no difference between PIO and VP with respect to the rates of pregnancy (51% vs. 53%), miscarriage (20% vs. 18%), or live birth (31% vs. 34%) (all P > 0.05). For participants taking PIO, the odds of pregnancy were 0.93 [95% CI (0.70, 1.25), P = 0.65] that of participants on VP.
CONCLUSION: In our single-centre experience, VP was non-inferior to PIO for endometrial preparation in FET cycles.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis comparing pregnancy, miscarriage, and live birth rates for PIO versus VP for medicated FET cycles, from 2017 to 2020 at a single fertility clinic. A total of 745 participants were included in the study; 438 received VP, and 307 received PIO. Univariate and multivariate binary and ordinal logistic regression analyses were performed to compare the rates of pregnancy, miscarriage, and live birth between VP and PIO.
RESULTS: Our data demonstrated no difference between PIO and VP with respect to the rates of pregnancy (51% vs. 53%), miscarriage (20% vs. 18%), or live birth (31% vs. 34%) (all P > 0.05). For participants taking PIO, the odds of pregnancy were 0.93 [95% CI (0.70, 1.25), P = 0.65] that of participants on VP.
CONCLUSION: In our single-centre experience, VP was non-inferior to PIO for endometrial preparation in FET cycles.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Consensus Statement on Vitamin D Status Assessment and Supplementation: Whys, Whens, and Hows.Endocrine Reviews 2024 April 28
The Tricuspid Valve: A Review of Pathology, Imaging, and Current Treatment Options: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.Circulation 2024 April 26
Intravenous infusion of dexmedetomidine during the surgery to prevent postoperative delirium and postoperative cognitive dysfunction undergoing non-cardiac surgery: a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.European Journal of Medical Research 2024 April 19
Interstitial Lung Disease: A Review.JAMA 2024 April 23
Ventilator Waveforms May Give Clues to Expiratory Muscle Activity.American Journal of Respiratory and Critical Care Medicine 2024 April 25
Acute Kidney Injury and Electrolyte Imbalances Caused by Dapagliflozin Short-Term Use.Pharmaceuticals 2024 March 27
Systemic lupus erythematosus.Lancet 2024 April 18
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app