Comparison of the efficacy of different progesterone regimens in blastocyst frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles

Year 2021, Volume: 4 Issue: 2, 137 - 141, 28.03.2021

Arzu Yurci , Nur Dokuzeylül Güngör , Tuğba Gürbüz

https://doi.org/10.32322/jhsm.839007

Abstract

Aim: The progesterone’s optimal route for luteal phase support (LPS) in frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) cycles is controversial. This study investigates the effect of three treatment regimens of progesterone: vaginal, oral, and subcutaneous form for LPS in FET cycles.
Material and Method: Blastocyst cryopreserved FET cycles utilizing vaginal, subcutaneous, or oral forms of progesterone between December 2018 and May 2020 were included. The main outcome was to compare clinical pregnancy rates (CPR), ongoing pregnancy rates (OPR), and live birth rates (LBR) in different progesterone groups.
Results: A total of 434 cycles were included, of which 200 utilized vaginal, 124 utilized subcutaneous, and 110 utilized oral forms. Demographic and cycle characteristics were similar between all three groups. Compared to cycles utilizing vaginal, subcutaneous, and oral forms, CPR, OPR, and LBR differ significantly between the three groups (p-value = 0.000). Miscarriage was calculated according to the number of days after embryo transfer, and it was shown that the subcutaneous group had the lowest rate of miscarriage with 11 cases (8.8%). The highest OPR was associated with the subcutaneous group with 67 (54%), followed by the vaginal group with 92 (46%). The highest LBR was in the subcutaneous group, with 59 (47.6%) cases. The oral group was significantly less successful 29 ( 26.4%) than the subcutaneous and vaginal groups.
Conclusion: Our study results showed that subcutaneous and vaginal progesterone performed better than oral progesterone for LPS in patients undergoing FET. All three forms of progesterone administration were safe and well-tolerated.

Keywords

Frozen-thawed embryo transfer,, luteal phase support,, progesterone,, in vitro fertilization

References

• 1.Propst AM, Hill JA, Ginsburg ES, Hurwitz S, Politch J, Yanushpolsky EH. A randomized study comparing Crinone 8% and intramuscular progesterone supplementation in in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer cycles. Fertility and steril 2001; 76: 1144-9.
• 2.Patki A, Pawar VC. Modulating fertility outcome in assisted reproductive technologies by the use of dydrogesterone. Gynecological Endocrin 2007; 23: 68-72.
• 3.Nawroth F, Ludwig M. What is the ‘ideal’duration of progesterone supplementation before the transfer of cryopreserved–thawed embryos in estrogen/progesterone replacement protocols? Human Reprod 2005; 20: 1127-34.
• 4.Ludwig M, Diedrich K. Evaluation of an optimal luteal phase support protocol in IVF. Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandina 2001; 80: 452-66.
• 5.Lee VCY, Li RHW, Ng EHY, Yeung WSB, Ho PC. Luteal phase support does not improve the clinical pregnancy rate of natural cycle frozen-thawed embryo transfer: a retrospective analysis. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Bio 2013; 169: 50-3.
• 6.Lan VTN, Tuan P, Canh L, Tuong H, Howles C. Progesterone supplementation during cryopreserved embryo transfer cycles: efficacy and convenience of two vaginal formulations. Reproductive biomedicine 2008; 17: 318-23.
• 7.Kyrou D, Fatemi HM, Popovic-Todorovic B, Van den Abbeel E, Camus M, Devroey P. Vaginal progesterone supplementation has no effect on ongoing pregnancy rate in hCG-induced natural frozen–thawed embryo transfer cycles. European Journal of Obstetrics & Gynecology and Reproductive Bio 2010; 150: 175-9.
• 8.Jing S, feng Li X, Zhang S, Gong F, Lu G, Lin G. Increased pregnancy complications following frozen-thawed embryo transfer during an artificial cycle. Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics. 2019; 36: 925-33.
• 9.Ho C-H, Chen S-U, Peng F-S, Chang C-Y, Yang Y-S. Luteal support for IVF/ICSI cycles with Crinone 8%(90 mg) twice daily results in higher pregnancy rates than with intramuscular progesterone. Journal of the Chinese Medical Assoc 2008; 71: 386-91.
• 10.Vaisbuch E, Leong M, Shoham Z. Progesterone support in IVF: is evidence-based medicine translated to clinical practice? A worldwide web-based survey. Reproductive biomedicine online. 2012; 25: 139-45.
• 11.Tomás C, Alsbjerg B, Martikainen H, Humaidan P. Pregnancy loss after frozen-embryo transfer—a comparison of three protocols. Fertility and steril 2012; 98: 1165-9.
• 12.Salehpour S, Tamimi M, Saharkhiz N. Comparison of oral dydrogesterone with suppository vaginal progesterone for luteal-phase support in in vitro fertilization (IVF): A randomized clinical trial. Iranian journal of reproductive medicine. 2013; 11: 913.
• 13.Bjuresten K, Landgren B-M, Hovatta O, Stavreus-Evers A. Luteal phase progesterone increases live birth rate after frozen embryo transfer. Fertility and steril 2011; 95: 534-7.
• 14.Shapiro BS, Daneshmand ST, Garner FC, Aguirre M, Ross R. Contrasting patterns in in vitro fertilization pregnancy rates among fresh autologous, fresh oocyte donor, and cryopreserved cycles with the use of day 5 or day 6 blastocysts may reflect differences in embryo-endometrium synchrony. Fertility and sterility. 2008;89(1):20-6.
• 15.Chakravarty BN, Shirazee HH, Dam P, Goswami SK, Chatterjee R, Ghosh S. Oral dydrogesterone versus intravaginal micronised progesterone as luteal phase support in assisted reproductive technology (ART) cycles: results of a randomised study. The Journal of steroid biochemistry and molecular biology. 2005; 97: 416-20.
• 16.Guo W, Chen X, Ye D, He Y, Li P, Niu J, et al. Effects of oral dydrogesterone on clinical outcomes of frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles. Nan fang yi ke da xue xue bao= Journal of Southern Medical Univ 2013; 33: 861-5.
• 17.Van der Linden M, Buckingham K, Farquhar C, Kremer JA, Metwally M. Luteal phase support for assisted reproduction cycles. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. 2011 (10).
• 18.Var T, Tonguc EA, Doğanay M, Gulerman C, Gungor T, Mollamahmutoglu L. A comparison of the effects of three different luteal phase support protocols on in vitro fertilization outcomes: a randomized clinical trial. Fertility and steril 2011; 95: 985-9.
• 19.Fujimoto A, Osuga Y, Fujiwara T, Yano T, Tsutsumi O, Momoeda M, et al. Human chorionic gonadotropin combined with progesterone for luteal support improves pregnancy rate in patients with low late-midluteal estradiol levels in IVF cycles. Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics 2002; 19: 550-4.
• 20.Bahceci M, Ulug U. Route of progesterone administration for luteal phase support may affect outcome of controlled ovarian hyperstimulation for IVF with ICSI using GnRH antagonist. Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics 2008; 25: 499-502.