Taiwanese journal of obstetrics & gynecology · 2022
Clinical use of aqueous subcutaneous progesterone compared with vaginal progesterone as luteal support in in vitro fertilization: A randomized controlled study in Taiwan.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Kao Tzu-Ching, Tu Yi-An, Yang Po-Kai, Huang Chu-Chun, Yang Jehn-Hsiahn, Chen Shee-Uan, Chao Kuang-Han
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to compare the efficacy, tolerability and patient satisfaction between aqueous subcutaneous progesterone (Prolutex, 25 mg/vial; IBSA) and vaginal progesterone (Crinone, 90 mg/tube; Merck) as luteal support for fresh embryo transfers in in-vitro fertilization (IVF).
MATERIALS & METHODS: In this prospective randomized study, 65 patients who underwent IVF were recruited and randomly assigned to either the Prolutex (25 mg daily, n = 33) or Crinone (90 mg daily, n = 32) group. The luteal support regimens were given daily, starting from two days after oocyte pickup. If the serum pregnancy test was positive, luteal support was continued until 7 weeks of gestation. Primary outcomes were clinical pregnancy rate and serum progesterone level at the mid-luteal phase and at 4 weeks of gestation. Secondary outcomes were drug tolerability and patient satisfaction assessed by questionnaire.
RESULTS: There were no significant differences in clinical pregnancy rates (Prolutex 25.0% versus Crinone 33.3%, p = 0.699), serum progesterone levels and patient satisfaction between Prolutex and Crinone group. Although the patients that had received Prolutex complained of more local pain at the injection sites, they also had less annoying vaginal discharges and vulvar discomforts.
CONCLUSION: Prolutex is of comparable efficacy and patient satisfaction to Crinone, and its availability means patients have more options in regards to the routes of progesterone administration as luteal phase support during IVF.
MATERIALS & METHODS: In this prospective randomized study, 65 patients who underwent IVF were recruited and randomly assigned to either the Prolutex (25 mg daily, n = 33) or Crinone (90 mg daily, n = 32) group. The luteal support regimens were given daily, starting from two days after oocyte pickup. If the serum pregnancy test was positive, luteal support was continued until 7 weeks of gestation. Primary outcomes were clinical pregnancy rate and serum progesterone level at the mid-luteal phase and at 4 weeks of gestation. Secondary outcomes were drug tolerability and patient satisfaction assessed by questionnaire.
RESULTS: There were no significant differences in clinical pregnancy rates (Prolutex 25.0% versus Crinone 33.3%, p = 0.699), serum progesterone levels and patient satisfaction between Prolutex and Crinone group. Although the patients that had received Prolutex complained of more local pain at the injection sites, they also had less annoying vaginal discharges and vulvar discomforts.
CONCLUSION: Prolutex is of comparable efficacy and patient satisfaction to Crinone, and its availability means patients have more options in regards to the routes of progesterone administration as luteal phase support during IVF.