Vaginal versus intramuscular progesterone for luteal phase support in assisted reproductive techniques: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

We aimed to compare the efficacy of vaginal progesterone versus intramuscular progesterone (IMP) for luteal phase support in assisted reproductive techniques (ART). A comprehensive electronic search of four electronic databases (PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, and ISI Web of Science) was performed from inception till August 2019 for randomized controlled trials (RCTs). We included studies performed different ART with the use of vaginal progesterone versus IMP for luteal phase support. Our primary outcome was clinical pregnancy rate. Our secondary outcomes were ongoing pregnancy, miscarriage, live birth rates, and satisfaction in both groups. 15 RCTs met our inclusion criteria with a total of 5656 patients. Our analysis indicated no significant differences between vaginal progesterone and IMP regarding clinical and ongoing pregnancies (RR = 0.90, 95% CI [0.80, 1.00], p = .06), (RR = 0.90, 95% CI [0.76, 1.06], p = .21), respectively. No significant differences were found between both routes of progesterone in miscarriage (p = .98) and live birth (p = .99). Subgroup analysis between fresh and frozen embryo transfer cycles in above outcomes showed no difference between progesterone routes. Vaginal progesterone was significantly associated with more satisfaction compared to IMP (p < .00001). In conclusion, vaginal progesterone can be used an alternative method for luteal phase support instead of IMP in ART.