Luteal phase support for women trying to conceive by intrauterine insemination or sexual intercourse.

Lingling Salang, Danielle M Teixeira, Ivan Solà, Jen Sothornwit, Wellington P Martins, Magdalena Bofill Rodriguez, Pisake Lumbiganon
Author Information
  1. Lingling Salang: Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.
  2. Danielle M Teixeira: Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Federal University of Paraná, Curitiba, Brazil.
  3. Ivan Solà: Iberoamerican Cochrane Centre, Biomedical Research Institute Sant Pau (IIB Sant Pau), CIBER Epidemiología y Salud Pública (CIBERESP), Barcelona, Spain.
  4. Jen Sothornwit: Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.
  5. Wellington P Martins: SEMEAR Fertilidade, Reproductive Medicine, Ribeirao Preto, Brazil.
  6. Magdalena Bofill Rodriguez: Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand.
  7. Pisake Lumbiganon: Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Faculty of Medicine, Khon Kaen University, Khon Kaen, Thailand.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Ovulation induction may impact endometrial receptivity due to insufficient progesterone secretion. Low progesterone is associated with poor pregnancy outcomes.
OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and safety of luteal phase support (LPS) in infertile women trying to conceive by intrauterine insemination or by sexual intercourse.
SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Gynaecology and Fertility Group Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, LILACS, trial registries for ongoing trials, and reference lists of articles (from inception to 25 August 2021).
SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of LPS using progestogen, human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG), or gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonist supplementation in IUI or natural cycle.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Our primary outcomes were live birth rate/ongoing pregnancy rate (LBR/OPR) and miscarriage.  MAIN RESULTS: We included 25 RCTs (5111 participants). Most studies were at unclear or high risk of bias. We graded the certainty of evidence as very low to low. The main limitations of the evidence were poor reporting and imprecision. 1. Progesterone supplement versus placebo or no treatment  We are uncertain if vaginal progesterone increases LBR/OPR (risk ratio (RR) 1.10, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.81 to 1.48; 7 RCTs; 1792 participants; low-certainty evidence) or decreases miscarriage per pregnancy compared to placebo or no treatment (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.40 to 1.25; 5 RCTs; 261 participants). There were no data on LBR or miscarriage with oral stimulation. We are uncertain if progesterone increases LBR/OPR in women with gonadotropin stimulation (RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.92; 4 RCTs; 1054 participants; low-certainty evidence) and oral stimulation (clomiphene citrate or letrozole) (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.64; 2 RCTs; 485 participants; low-certainty evidence). One study reported on OPR in women with gonadotropin plus oral stimulation; the evidence from this study was uncertain (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.37 to 1.42; 1 RCT; 253 participants; low-certainty evidence). Given the low certainty of the evidence, it is unclear if progesterone reduces miscarriage per clinical pregnancy in any stimulation protocol (RR 0.68, 95% CI 0.24 to 1.91; 2 RCTs; 102 participants, with gonadotropin; RR 0.67, 95% CI 0.30 to 1.50; 2 RCTs; 123 participants, with gonadotropin plus oral stimulation; and RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.25 to 1.14; 2 RCTs; 119 participants, with oral stimulation). Low-certainty evidence suggests that progesterone in all types of ovarian stimulation may increase clinical pregnancy compared to placebo (RR 1.38, 95% CI 1.10 to 1.74; 7 RCTs; 1437 participants, with gonadotropin; RR 1.40, 95% CI 1.03 to 1.90; 4 RCTs; 733 participants, with gonadotropin plus oral stimulation (clomiphene citrate or letrozole); and RR 1.44, 95% CI 1.04 to 1.98; 6 RCTs; 1073 participants, with oral stimulation). 2. Progesterone supplementation regimen  We are uncertain if there is any difference between 300 mg and 600 mg of vaginal progesterone for OPR and multiple pregnancy (RR 1.58, 95% CI 0.81 to 3.09; 1 RCT; 200 participants; very low-certainty evidence; and RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.05 to 5.43; 1 RCT; 200 participants, very low-certainty evidence, respectively). No other outcomes were reported for this comparison. There were three different comparisons between progesterone regimens. For OPR, the evidence is very uncertain for intramuscular (IM) versus vaginal progesterone (RR 0.59, 95% CI 0.34 to 1.02; 1 RCT; 225 participants; very low-certainty evidence); we are uncertain if there is any difference between oral and vaginal progesterone (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.70 to 2.22; 1 RCT; 150 participants; very low-certainty evidence) or between subcutaneous and vaginal progesterone (RR 1.05, 95% CI 0.54 to 2.05; 1 RCT; 246 participants; very low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain if IM or oral progesterone reduces miscarriage per clinical pregnancy compared to vaginal progesterone (RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.43 to 1.32; 1 RCT; 81 participants and RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.11 to 3.09; 1 RCT; 41 participants, respectively). Clinical pregnancy and multiple pregnancy were reported for all comparisons; the evidence for these outcomes was very uncertain. Only one RCT reported adverse effects. We are uncertain if IM route increases the risk of adverse effects when compared with the vaginal route (RR 9.25, 95% CI 2.21 to 38.78; 1 RCT; 225 participants; very low-certainty evidence). 3. GnRH agonist versus placebo or no treatment  No trials reported live birth. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of GnRH agonist in ongoing pregnancy (RR 1.10, 95% CI 0.70 to 1.74; 1 RCT; 291 participants, very low-certainty evidence), miscarriage per clinical pregnancy (RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.26 to 2.10; 2 RCTs; 79 participants, very low-certainty evidence) and clinical pregnancy (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.47; 2 RCTs; 340 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and multiple pregnancy (RR 0.28, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.70; 2 RCTs; 126 participants). 4. GnRH agonist versus vaginal progesterone  The evidence for the effect of GnRH agonist injection on clinical pregnancy is very uncertain (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.51 to 1.95; 1 RCT; 242 participants). 5. HCG injection versus no treatment  The evidence for the effect of hCG injection on clinical pregnancy (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.40 to 2.13; 1 RCT; 130 participants) and multiple pregnancy rates (RR 1.03, 95% CI 0.22 to 4.92; 1 RCT; 130 participants) is very uncertain. 6. Luteal support in natural cycle No study evaluated the effect of LPS in natural cycle. We could not perform sensitivity analyses, as there were no studies at low risk of selection bias and not at high risk in other domains.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We are uncertain if vaginal progesterone supplementation during luteal phase is associated with a higher live birth/ongoing pregnancy rate. Vaginal progesterone may increase clinical pregnancy rate; however, its effect on miscarriage rate and multiple pregnancy rate is uncertain. We are uncertain if IM progesterone improves ongoing pregnancy rates or decreases miscarriage rate when compared to vaginal progesterone. Regarding the other reported comparisons, neither oral progesterone nor any other medication appears to be associated with an improvement in pregnancy outcomes (very low-certainty evidence).

References

  1. Hum Reprod. 2007 Jun;22(6):1506-12 [PMID: 17376819]
  2. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Aug 24;8:CD012396 [PMID: 36000704]
  3. Fertil Steril. 1993 Jun;59(6):1251-6 [PMID: 8495774]
  4. Iran J Reprod Med. 2013 Apr;11(4):309-14 [PMID: 24639761]
  5. Fertil Steril. 2010 Aug;94(3):1065-71 [PMID: 19501354]
  6. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Feb;47(2):144-51 [PMID: 25854891]
  7. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018 May 24;5:CD010287 [PMID: 29797697]
  8. Indian J Endocrinol Metab. 2013 Jan;17(1):44-9 [PMID: 23776852]
  9. Clin Obstet Gynecol. 1993 Sep;36(3):711-8 [PMID: 8403617]
  10. Reprod Biomed Online. 2009;19 Suppl 4:4239 [PMID: 20034415]
  11. Reprod Health. 2014 Nov 11;11:78 [PMID: 25385669]
  12. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2003 Apr;17(2):169-85 [PMID: 12758094]
  13. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2018 Jul 1;103(7):2743-2751 [PMID: 29767754]
  14. Fertil Steril. 1983 Oct;40(4):469-71 [PMID: 6617905]
  15. Fertil Steril. 2009 Jun;91(6):2508-13 [PMID: 18692788]
  16. Obstet Gynecol Int. 2020 Aug 5;2020:6234070 [PMID: 32831851]
  17. Hum Reprod. 2015 Oct;30(10):2387-95 [PMID: 26209535]
  18. Fertil Steril. 1993 Jul;60(1):26-33 [PMID: 8513955]
  19. Endocrine. 2013 Apr;43(2):314-7 [PMID: 22930247]
  20. Hum Reprod. 1998 Jul;13(7):1968-74 [PMID: 9740459]
  21. Fertil Steril. 1990 Jul;54(1):27-31 [PMID: 2113488]
  22. Hum Fertil (Camb). 2016 Jun;19(2):142-9 [PMID: 27434094]
  23. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2015 Jul 07;(7):CD009154 [PMID: 26148507]
  24. Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand. 2001 Jun;80(6):574-82 [PMID: 11380297]
  25. BMJ Open. 2015 May 15;5(5):e007588 [PMID: 25979869]
  26. Early Pregnancy (Cherry Hill). 2000 Jan;4(1):64-73 [PMID: 11719823]
  27. Obstet Gynecol. 1992 Jun;79(6):983-7 [PMID: 1579327]
  28. Hum Reprod. 2010 Oct;25(10):2501-6 [PMID: 20719809]
  29. Hum Reprod. 1998 Dec;13(12):3315-8 [PMID: 9886506]
  30. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2014 Jan;31(1):89-100 [PMID: 24189966]
  31. Hum Reprod. 2000 Aug;15 Suppl 3:96-111 [PMID: 11041226]
  32. Fertil Steril. 2017 Apr;107(4):924-933.e5 [PMID: 28238492]
  33. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2020 Jan;36(1):77-80 [PMID: 31464143]
  34. J Clin Diagn Res. 2016 Feb;10(2):QE01-4 [PMID: 27042538]
  35. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2011 Jul;157(1):57-62 [PMID: 21514032]
  36. Minerva Ginecol. 1997 Jul-Aug;49(7-8):361-4 [PMID: 9380299]
  37. Fertil Steril. 1988 Sep;50(3):403-7 [PMID: 3137096]
  38. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2016;32(1):55-7 [PMID: 26291817]
  39. Am J Obstet Gynecol. 1971 Jun 15;110(4):470-7 [PMID: 5582003]
  40. J Family Reprod Health. 2014 Dec;8(4):149-53 [PMID: 25530766]
  41. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2019 Jan 16;1:CD010290 [PMID: 30648738]
  42. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2010 Apr;95(4):1955-61 [PMID: 20133465]
  43. Reprod Biomed Online. 2016 Jun;32(6):563-83 [PMID: 27151490]
  44. Fertil Steril. 2006 Mar;85(3):783-6 [PMID: 16500364]
  45. Semin Reprod Med. 2006 Feb;24(1):33-9 [PMID: 16418976]
  46. Saudi Med J. 2003 Jan;24(1):34-6 [PMID: 12590270]
  47. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2014 Mar;30(3):197-201 [PMID: 24397361]
  48. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013 Mar 28;(3):CD010042 [PMID: 23543584]
  49. Steroids. 2000 Oct-Nov;65(10-11):645-9 [PMID: 11108871]
  50. J Obstet Gynaecol. 2016 Aug;36(6):794-799 [PMID: 27146108]
  51. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2015 Apr;45(4):377-93 [PMID: 25302750]
  52. Int J Fertil. 1989 May-Jun;34(3):209-14 [PMID: 2567717]
  53. Semin Reprod Med. 2010 Jan;28(1):36-43 [PMID: 20104427]
  54. Hum Reprod Update. 2001 Nov-Dec;7(6):581-90 [PMID: 11727867]
  55. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2009 Jun;21(3):279-84 [PMID: 19262381]
  56. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2013 Mar;29(3):205-8 [PMID: 23127204]
  57. Hum Reprod. 2015 Aug;30(8):1942-51 [PMID: 26082480]
  58. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Jun 10;6:CD009517 [PMID: 34110001]
  59. Iran J Reprod Med. 2015 Jul;13(7):433-8 [PMID: 26494991]
  60. J Reprod Med. 2014 Jan-Feb;59(1-2):25-30 [PMID: 24597283]
  61. Fertil Steril. 2010 Sep;94(4):1296-1301 [PMID: 19608168]
  62. Fertil Steril. 2006 Feb;85(2):407-11 [PMID: 16595219]
  63. J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol. 2005 Dec;97(5):389-96 [PMID: 16198558]
  64. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2012 Dec;165(2):249-53 [PMID: 22940119]
  65. Reprod Biomed Online. 2015 Jan;30(1):52-6 [PMID: 25456166]
  66. Hum Reprod. 2005 May;20(5):1144-7 [PMID: 15802321]
  67. Turk J Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Jun;13(2):90-94 [PMID: 28913099]
  68. J Dairy Sci. 2019 Mar;102(3):2593-2606 [PMID: 30692012]
  69. J Clin Diagn Res. 2016 Jan;10(1):QC08-10 [PMID: 26894126]
  70. Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:951937 [PMID: 24877150]
  71. Int J Fertil Steril. 2014 Oct;8(3):235-42 [PMID: 25379150]
  72. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol. 2016 Aug;48(2):161-70 [PMID: 26577241]
  73. Fertil Steril. 2016 Nov;106(6):1490-1495 [PMID: 27565253]
  74. Hum Reprod. 2005 Jul;20(7):1798-804 [PMID: 15890740]
  75. J Reprod Med. 2014 May-Jun;59(5-6):260-6 [PMID: 24937967]
  76. Fertil Steril. 1992 Aug;58(2):249-61 [PMID: 1633889]

MeSH Term

Abortion, Spontaneous
Chorionic Gonadotropin
Clomiphene
Coitus
Female
Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone
Humans
Insemination
Letrozole
Lipopolysaccharides
Live Birth
Luteal Phase
Pregnancy
Pregnancy Rate
Progesterone

Chemicals

Chorionic Gonadotropin
Lipopolysaccharides
Clomiphene
Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone
Progesterone
Letrozole

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.010participantsRR95%CIevidencepregnancyprogesteroneRCTsuncertainlow-certaintyRCT2vaginaloralstimulationmiscarriageclinicalgonadotropin25ratereportedoutcomesGnRHagonistriskversuscomparedmultipleeffectwomenlowplacebo10per704IMmayassociatedphasesupportLPSongoingtrialssupplementationnaturalcycleliveLBR/OPRtreatment increases8140558studyOPRplus305comparisonsinjectionpoorlutealtryingconceiveintrauterineinseminationsexualintercourseCochranehCGbirthstudiesunclearhighbiascertaintyProgesterone7decreases2492clomiphenecitrateletrozole73reduces6850increase3874036differencemg0920043respectively2252211adverseeffectsroute00130ratesLutealBACKGROUND:OvulationinductionimpactendometrialreceptivitydueinsufficientsecretionLowOBJECTIVES:assesseffectivenesssafetyinfertileSEARCHMETHODS:searchedGynaecologyFertilityGroupSpecialisedRegisterCENTRALMEDLINEEmbasePsycINFOLILACStrialregistriesreferencelistsarticlesinceptionAugust2021SELECTIONCRITERIA:Randomisedcontrolledusingprogestogenhumanchorionicgonadotropin-releasinghormoneIUIDATACOLLECTIONANDANALYSIS:usedstandardmethodologicalproceduresexpectedprimaryrate/ongoing MAINRESULTS:included5111gradedmainlimitationsreportingimprecisionsupplementratioconfidenceinterval481792treatment261dataLBR8010549764485One3742253Givenprotocol9110267301235314119Low-certaintysuggeststypesovarian1437907334404981073regimen 300600comparisonthreedifferentregimensintramuscular593402150subcutaneous54246753241Clinicalone9217829126794734028126progesterone 5195242HCG9313evaluatedperformsensitivityanalysesselectiondomainsAUTHORS'CONCLUSIONS:higherbirth/ongoingVaginalhoweverimprovesRegardingneithermedicationappearsimprovement

Similar Articles

Cited By