Experience with progesterone gel for luteal support in a highly successful IVF programme

Efficacy of luteal support from single daily administration of Crinone® 8% (progesterone gel) was tested in 43 women in an IVF programme with historical pregnancy rates >50%. Results were compared with those achieved in 46 women concurrently undergoing IVF and receiving 50 mg i.m. progesterone, a...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Human reproduction (Oxford) 2000-06, Vol.15 (6), p.1284-1288
Main Authors: Schoolcraft, W.B., Hesla, J.S., Gee, M.J.
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adult
assisted reproduction
Biological and medical sciences
Birth Rate
Corpus Luteum - drug effects
Corpus Luteum - physiology
Crinone
Female
Fertilization in Vitro
Gels
Genital system. Reproduction
Humans
Injections, Intramuscular
luteal support
Medical sciences
Patient Acceptance of Health Care
Pharmacology. Drug treatments
Pregnancy
Pregnancy Outcome
Pregnancy Rate
progesterone
Progesterone - administration & dosage
Progesterone - analogs & derivatives
Progesterone - therapeutic use
vaginal progesterone
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Efficacy of luteal support from single daily administration of Crinone® 8% (progesterone gel) was tested in 43 women in an IVF programme with historical pregnancy rates >50%. Results were compared with those achieved in 46 women concurrently undergoing IVF and receiving 50 mg i.m. progesterone, and with historical data. Pregnancy rates (PR) were evaluated approximately 2 weeks after undergoing IVF by human chorionic gonadotrophin (HCG) measurement (total PR), by ultrasound 2–4 weeks later (clinical PR), and by counting births. Prior experience with other progesterone formulations was compared with that of Crinone 8%. Demographic and IVF characteristics were comparable for both concurrently treated groups. Total PR, clinical PR and live birth rates were similar for the Crinone and the concurrent i.m. progesterone groups: 31 (72.1%) versus 34 (73.9%); 26 (60.5%) versus 28 (60.9%), and 23 (53.5%) versus 23 (50%) respectively. Clinical PR and live birth rates were also similar to the last data reported to the Society for Assisted Reproduction Therapy. Overall acceptability of Crinone 8% was excellent. Among subjects with prior i.m. injection experience, most patients (69.2%) agreed that the gel was easier to use, less painful (76.9%) and less time-consuming (61.5%) than i.m. injections. In conclusion, Crinone 8% offers an appreciable improvement, as it provides an effective luteal support option that avoids painful i.m. injections.
ISSN:0268-1161
1460-2350
DOI:10.1093/humrep/15.6.1284