Abstract
Objective To compare the effectiveness of i.m. P and 17alpha-hydroxyprogesterone caproate (17-HPC) for luteal phase support, in patients undergoing IVF-ET cycles.
Design Prospective, randomized study.
Setting Patients undergoing IVF-ET in our Centers.
PATIENT(S): The inclusion criteria were the use of GnRH down-regulation and aged <40 years.
INTERVENTION(S): A total of 300 cycles were randomly treated with either 17-HPC (341 mg every 3 days) or P (50 mg daily).
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): The outcomes of IVF in both study groups were evaluated for biochemical pregnancy, miscarriage, clinical pregnancy, and ongoing pregnancy.
RESULT(S): No difference was found in the main outcome parameters considered.
CONCLUSION(S): Although the results of the study encourage the use of 17-HPC for luteal phase support in patients undergoing IVF-ET program, more studies are necessary to support the hypothesis that it can replace i.m. P-in-oil.
progesterone vs 17-hydroxyprogesterone caproate ivf, luteal phase support progesterone formulations, 17-hpc ivf embryo transfer outcomes, intramuscular progesterone luteal support, progesterone in oil vs 17-ohp ivf, luteal phase 17-hydroxyprogesterone pregnancy rate, ivf luteal support progesterone comparison, 17-hpc dosing luteal phase, progesterone formulation ivf clinical pregnancy, randomized trial luteal progesterone ivf
Keywords
17 alpha-Hydroxyprogesterone Caproate, Adult, Embryo Transfer, Female, Fertilization in Vitro, Humans, Hydroxyprogesterones/therapeutic Use, Infertility, Female/drug Therapy, Injections, Intramuscular, Male, Outcome Assessment, Health Care, Pregnancy, Progesterone/therapeutic Use, Prospective Studies, Hydroxyprogesterones, 17 alpha-Hydroxyprogesterone Caproate, Progesterone,