» Articles » PMID: 36303972

Luteal Phase Support Using Subcutaneous Progesterone: A Systematic Review

Overview
Date 2022 Oct 28
PMID 36303972
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Luteal phase support (LPS) is crucial in assisted reproductive technology (ART) cycles when the luteal phase has been found to be defective. Such deficiency is most likely related to the supraphysiological steroid levels that usually occurr in stimulated cycles which, in turn, could severely affect luteinizing hormone (LH) secretion and function, thereby negatively influencing the luteal phase. A number of different medications and routes have been successfully used for LPS in ART. Although an optimal protocol has not yet been identified, the existing plethora of medications offer the opportunity to personalize LPS according to individual needs. Subcutaneous administration progesterone has been proposed for LPS and could represent an alternative to a vaginal and intramuscular route. The aim of the present systematic review is to summarize the evidence found in the literature concerning the application of subcutaneous progesterone in ARTs, highlighting the benefits and limits of this novel strategy. With this aim in mind, we carried out systematic research in the Medline, ISI Web of Knowledge, and Embase databases from their inception through to November 2020. Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were preferred by the authors in the elaboration of this article, although case-control and cohort studies have also been considered. According to our findings, evidence exists which supports that, in women with a good prognosis undergoing a fresh fertilization (IVF) cycle, subcutaneous Pg is not inferior to vaginal products. In the Frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) cycle, data concerning efficacy is mixed with an increased miscarriage rate in women undergoing a subcutaneous route in oocyte donor recipients. Data concerning the acceptance of the subcutaneous route versus the vaginal route are encouraging despite the different scales and questionnaires which were used. In addition, a cost-effective analysis has not yet been conducted.

Citing Articles

Comparing the outcomes of in-vitro fertilization in patients receiving vaginal, subcutaneous, and intramuscular progesterone for luteal phase support: a three-armed randomized controlled trial.

Tehraninejad E, Alizadeh S, Nekoo E, Zargarzadeh N, Shariat M, Haghollahi F BMC Womens Health. 2024; 24(1):481.

PMID: 39223536 PMC: 11367876. DOI: 10.1186/s12905-024-03337-z.


Comparison of luteal support protocols in fresh IVF/ICSI cycles: a network meta-analysis.

Kastora S, Gkova G, Stavridis K, Balachandren N, Kastoras A, Karakatsanis A Sci Rep. 2024; 14(1):14492.

PMID: 38914570 PMC: 11196689. DOI: 10.1038/s41598-024-64804-z.


Corpus luteum and progesterones in embryo transfer cycles: current challenges of different luteal phase support protocols.

Souza M, Antunes R, Souza M, Nakagawa H, Silva A, Cordts E JBRA Assist Reprod. 2024; 28(2):211-214.

PMID: 38775322 PMC: 11152424. DOI: 10.5935/1518-0557.20240044.

References
1.
Fatemi H . The luteal phase after 3 decades of IVF: what do we know?. Reprod Biomed Online. 2009; 19 Suppl 4:4331. View

2.
Doblinger J, Cometti B, Trevisan S, Griesinger G . Subcutaneous Progesterone Is Effective and Safe for Luteal Phase Support in IVF: An Individual Patient Data Meta-Analysis of the Phase III Trials. PLoS One. 2016; 11(3):e0151388. PMC: 4798618. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0151388. View

3.
Alviggi C, Conforti A, Carbone I, Borrelli R, De Placido G, Guerriero S . Influence of cryopreservation on perinatal outcome after blastocyst- vs cleavage-stage embryo transfer: systematic review and meta-analysis. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2017; 51(1):54-63. DOI: 10.1002/uog.18942. View

4.
Humaidan P, Engmann L, Benadiva C . Luteal phase supplementation after gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist trigger in fresh embryo transfer: the American versus European approaches. Fertil Steril. 2015; 103(4):879-85. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.01.034. View

5.
. Revised 2003 consensus on diagnostic criteria and long-term health risks related to polycystic ovary syndrome. Fertil Steril. 2004; 81(1):19-25. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2003.10.004. View