A meta-analysis of the route of administration of luteal phase support in assisted reproductive technology: vaginal versus intramuscular progesterone

P.W. Zarutskie; James A. Phillips

doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.02.018

A meta-analysis of the route of administration of luteal phase support in assisted reproductive technology: vaginal versus intramuscular progesterone

P.W. Zarutskie, James A. Phillips

In: Fertility and Sterility · 2009 · vol. 92(1) , pp. 163–169 · doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.02.018 · PMID:19362303 · W2039002801

review OA: closed CC0 ⤵ 3 in-corpus citations

View on OpenAlex View on PubMed View at publisher

⚙ AI-generated summary by claude@2026-06, 2026-06-08 ⓘ

This meta-analysis compared vaginal versus intramuscular progesterone for luteal phase support in assisted reproductive technology, evaluating its impact on outcomes.

One-sentence paraphrase of the abstract; not a substitute for reading it. No clinical advice. How this works

Abstract

ObjectiveTo perform an analysis of data with consideration for the current clinically accepted vaginal progesterone (P) or intramuscular (IM) P dosing regimens and the clinically relevant randomized clinical trials published during the time frame 1992 to 2008.DesignMeta-analysis of progesterone luteal support in IVF cycles using odds ratios (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI).SettingPreviously conducted randomized clinical trials meeting acceptance criteria.Patient(s)Infertility patients.Intervention(s)Progesterone (50 mg) IM daily or 200 mg P-in-oil capsules three times a day vaginally or 90 mg P in bioadhesive gel daily vaginally.Main outcome measure(s)Clinical pregnancy, ongoing pregnancy, miscarriage.Result(s)This analysis showed a comparable effect between vaginal progesterone as an oil-in-capsule or as a bioadhesive gel and IM P administration on the endpoints of clinical pregnancy (OR = 0.91, 95% [CI 0.74, 1.13]) and ongoing pregnancy (OR = 0.94, 95% [CI 0.71, 1.26]). A nominally significantly lower rate of miscarriage was observed with vaginal P compared with IM P (OR = 0.54, 95% [CI 0.29, 1.02]).Conclusion(s)Administration of vaginal P is comparable to administration of IM P for luteal phase support in assisted reproductive technology.

My notes (saved in your browser only)

Citation neighborhood (sparse)

Too few in-corpus citations on either side for a chart; here are the lists.

Cites (3)

Cited by (3)

References (43)

A comparative, randomized study of three different progesterone support of the luteal phase following IVF/ET program via openalex
Crinone 8% (90 mg) given once daily for progesterone replacement therapy in donor egg cycles via openalex
Use of Crinone∗ vaginal progesterone gel for luteal support in in vitro fertilization cycles via openalex
doi:10.1016/s0015-0282(01)02872-2 via openalex
doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.03.072 via openalex
doi:10.1016/s0015-0282(16)49949-8 via openalex
doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.02.012 via openalex
doi:10.1093/humrep/16.1.145 via openalex
doi:10.1016/s1472-6483(10)60597-4 via openalex
doi:10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a137611 via openalex
doi:10.1007/s10815-007-9168-z via openalex
doi:10.1093/humupd/dmm021 via openalex
W2397550583 via openalex
W6603536631 via openalex
W6610091363 via openalex
W6662981737 via openalex
W6668215887 via openalex
W6673771426 via openalex
W6712511644 via openalex
doi:10.1097/00006250-200003000-00017 via openalex
doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.02.095 via openalex
doi:10.1016/s0301-2115(02)00010-6 via openalex
doi:10.1093/humrep/deg018 via openalex
doi:10.1016/s0015-0282(00)01158-4 via openalex
doi:10.1016/s0015-0282(00)01151-1 via openalex
doi:10.1080/j.0001-6349.2005.0854b.x via openalex
doi:10.3109/9780203092934-44 via openalex
doi:10.1002/14651858.cd004830 via openalex
doi:10.1016/s1726-4901(08)70088-1 via openalex
doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2006.05.067 via openalex
doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.03.006 via openalex
doi:10.1016/s0015-0282(00)01336-4 via openalex
doi:10.1081/ddc-200040251 via openalex
doi:10.1016/s0015-0282(03)01233-0 via openalex
doi:10.1016/s0015-0282(03)01221-4 via openalex
doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.07.456 via openalex
doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.02.035 via openalex
doi:10.1016/s0015-0282(97)00457-3 via openalex
doi:10.1093/humrep/15.6.1284 via openalex
W86560391 via openalex
doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.01.069 via openalex
W276193907 via openalex
doi:10.1016/s0015-0282(16)56758-2 via openalex

Cited by (3)

Source provenance

openalex: last seen: 2026-05-11T06:38:17.545654+00:00
unpaywall: last seen: 2026-07-31T06:42:51.797318+00:00

License: CC0 · commercial use OK

[1] A comparative, randomized study of three different progesterone support of the luteal phase following IVF/ET program 1995

[2] Use of Crinone∗ vaginal progesterone gel for luteal support in in vitro fertilization cycles 1999

[3] Crinone 8% (90 mg) given once daily for progesterone replacement therapy in donor egg cycles 1999