Literature DB >> 8943507

Luteal support after in-vitro fertilization: Crinone 8%, a sustained release vaginal progesterone gel, versus Utrogestan, an oral micronized progesterone.

J L Pouly1, S Bassil, R Frydman, B Hedon, B Nicollet, Y Prada, J M Antoine, R Zambrano, J Donnez.   

Abstract

Two progesterone presentations, a vaginal application of 90 mg progesterone per day (Crinone) or 300 mg progesterone administered orally (Utrogestan), were compared for luteal phase support of patients undergoing an in-vitro fertilization (IVF) procedure. A total of 283 patients were randomly allocated to either treatment. The treatment started within 24 h after the embryo transfer procedure and continued until day 30 in cases of implantation. Efficacy was assessed using the pregnancy and delivery rates. Safety was assessed through specific symptoms and usual safety monitoring. The pregnancy rates per transfer were not significantly different in the Crinone and Utrogestan groups at days 12 (Crinone 35.3%, Utrogestan 29.9%, P = 0.55), 30 (Crinone 28.5%, Utrogestan 25.0%, P = 0.61) and 90 (Crinone 25.9%, Utrogestan 22.9%, P = 0.69). No differences in the spontaneous abortion rates were seen thereafter. The delivery rates (number of deliveries per patient; Crinone 23.0%, Utrogestan 22.2%, P = 1.00), as well as the ratio of newborn babies per embryo transferred (Crinone 11.7%, Utrogestan 11.1%, P = 0.91), were not significantly different. Safety parameters were similar in both groups, except for drowsiness, which was more significantly frequent in the oral progesterone group than in the Crinone group at all time points. No serious adverse events were recorded in this study. The fact that Crinone matches the efficacy of the larger doses of progesterone used orally reflects an advantage of the transvaginal route of administration which avoids the metabolic inactivation of progesterone during its first liver pass.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8943507     DOI: 10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a019054

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hum Reprod        ISSN: 0268-1161            Impact factor:   6.918


  6 in total

Review 1.  Progesterone vaginal ring for luteal support.

Authors:  Laurel Stadtmauer; Kay Waud
Journal:  J Obstet Gynaecol India       Date:  2014-11-05

Review 2.  Luteal phase support for assisted reproduction cycles.

Authors:  Michelle van der Linden; Karen Buckingham; Cindy Farquhar; Jan A M Kremer; Mostafa Metwally
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2015-07-07

Review 3.  Natural Micronized Progesterone Sustained Release (SR) and Luteal Phase: Role Redefined!!

Authors:  Sonia Malik; Korukonda Krishnaprasad
Journal:  J Clin Diagn Res       Date:  2016-02-01

4.  Comparison of intravaginal progesterone gel and intramuscular 17-α-hydroxyprogesterone caproate in luteal phase support.

Authors:  Funda Satir; Tayfun Toptas; Murat Inel; Munire Erman-Akar; Omur Taskin
Journal:  Exp Ther Med       Date:  2013-04-04       Impact factor: 2.447

Review 5.  A review of conventional and sustained-release formulations of oral natural micronized progesterone in obstetric indications.

Authors:  Girija Narendrakumar Wagh; K M Kundavi Shankar; Sumitra Bachani
Journal:  Drugs Context       Date:  2021-10-13

6.  Efficacy of four vaginal progesterones for luteal phase support in frozen-thawed embryo transfer cycles: A randomized clinical trial.

Authors:  Reiko Shiba; Masayuki Kinutani; Shinichiro Okano; Reo Kawano; Yuko Kikkawa
Journal:  Reprod Med Biol       Date:  2019-09-16
  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.