The efficiency of progesterone vaginal gel versus intramuscular progesterone for luteal phase supplementation in gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist cycles: a prospective clinical trial

Semra Kahraman, S. Hale Karagozoglu, G. Karlikaya
In: Fertility and Sterility · 2009 · vol. 94(2) , pp. 761–763 · doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.10.004 · PMID:19939363 · W2109501952
article OA: closed CC0 ⤵ 1 in-corpus citation
View on OpenAlex View on PubMed View at publisher
⚙ AI-generated summary by claude@2026-06, 2026-06-13 ⓘ

This prospective clinical trial compared the efficiency of progesterone vaginal gel versus intramuscular progesterone for luteal phase supplementation in women undergoing gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist cycles.

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

Abstract

We compared the efficiency of progesterone vaginal gel (PVG) with intramuscular progesterone (IMP) supplementation for luteal phase support after in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer in gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist cycles. The treatment outcomes were similar for PVG and IMP for luteal support in GnRH-antagonist protocols. With its ease of use, high tolerability by patients, and fewer side effects, PVG can be a successful alternative to IMP.

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 (2)

Cited by (1)

References (20)

Cited by (1)

Source provenance

openalex
last seen: 2026-06-10T17:14:06.276822+00:00
unpaywall
last seen: 2026-08-01T06:38:12.426807+00:00
License: CC0 · commercial use OK