Volume 13, Issue 7 (9-2015)                   IJRM 2015, 13(7): 433-438 | Back to browse issues page

XML Persian Abstract Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
Khosravi D, Taheripanah R, Taheripanah A, Tarighat Monfared V, Hosseini Zijoud S. Comparison of oral dydrogesterone with vaginal progesteronefor luteal support in IUI cycles: a randomized clinical trial. IJRM 2015; 13 (7) :433-438
URL: http://ijrm.ir/article-1-663-en.html
Comparison of oral dydrogesterone with vaginal progesteronefor luteal support in IUI cycles: a randomized clinical trial
Donya Khosravi1 , Robabeh Taheripanah * 2, Anahita Taheripanah3 , Vahid Tarighat Monfared4 , Seyed-Mostafa Hosseini Zijoud5
1- Infertility and Reproductive Health Research Center (IRHRC), Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
2- Infertility and Reproductive Health Research Center (IRHRC), Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran , Taherioanahf@gmail.com
3- Department of Molecular and Cellular Sciences, Faculty of Advanced Sciences and Technology Pharmaceutical Sciences Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran-Iran.(IAUPS)
4- Islamic Azad Univercity, Saveh Branch, Saveh-Iran
5- Social Development and Health Promotion Research Center, Kermanshah University of Medical Sciences, Kermanshah, Iran
Abstract:   (3343 Views)
Background: The aim of this study, we have compared the advantages of oral dydrogestrone with vaginal progesterone (cyclogest) for luteal support in intrauterine insemination (IUI) cycles. Progesterone supplementation is the first line treatment when luteal phase deficiency (LPD) can reasonably be assumed.
Objective: This study was conduct to compare the effect of oral dydrogestrone with vaginal Cyclogest on luteal phase support in the IUI cycles.
Materials and Methods: This prospective, randomized, double blind study was performed in a local infertility center from May 2013 to May 2014. It consisted of 150 infertile women younger than35years old undergoing ovarian stimulation for IUI cycles. They underwent ovarian stimulation with oral dydrogesterone (20 mg) as group A and vaginal cyclogest (400 mg) as group B in preparation for the IUI cycles. Clinical pregnancy and abortion rates, mid luteal progesterone (7daysafter IUI) and patient satisfaction were compared between two groups.
Results: The mean serum progesterone levels was significantly higher in group A in comparison with group B (p=0.001). Pregnancy rates in group A was not statistically different in comparison with group B (p =0.58). Abortion rate in two groups was not statistically different (p =0.056) although rate of abortion was higher in group B in comparison with A group. Satisfaction rates were significantly higher in group A compared to group B (p<0.001).
Conclusion: We concluded that oral dydrogestrone is effective as vaginal progesterone for luteal-phase support in woman undergoing IUI cycles.
Moreover, the mean serum progesterone levels and satisfaction rates in dydrogestrone group were higher than cyclogest group.
Keywords: Progestins, Luteal-phase, Gonadal hormones.
Full-Text [PDF 443 kb]   (787 Downloads) |   |   Full-Text (HTML)  (607 Views)  
Type of Study: Original Article |
References
1. Honda T, Tsutsumi M, Komoda F, Tatsumi K. Acceptable pregnancy rate of unstimulated intrauterine insemination: a retrospective analysis of 17,830 cycles. Reprod Med Biol 2015; 14: 27–32. [DOI:10.1007/s12522-014-0192-2]
2. Cohlen BJ. Should luteal phase support be introduced in ovarian stimulation/IUI programmes? An evidence-based review.Reprod Biomed Online 2009; 19: 4239. [DOI:10.1016/S1472-6483(10)61067-X]
3. Miralpeix E, González-Comadran M, Solà I, Manau D, Carreras R, Checa MA. Efficacy of luteal phase support with vaginal progesterone in intrauterineinsemination: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Assist Reprod Genet 2014; 31:89-100. [DOI:10.1007/s10815-013-0127-6]
4. Aali BS, Ebrahimipour S, MedhdizadehS. The effectiveness of luteal phase support with cyclogest in ovarian stimulated intra uterine insemination cycles: A randomized controlled trial. Iran J Reprod Med 2013; 11: 309-314.
5. Lo Monte G, Piva I, Bazzan E, Marci R, OgrinC. Luteal phase support for assisted reproductive technologies: between past, present and future. Minerva Endocrinol 2013; 38: 401-414.
6. American society for reproductive medicine. The clinical relevance of luteal phase deficiency: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril 2012; 98: 1112-1117. [DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.06.050]
7. Oktem M, Altinkaya SO, Yilmaz SA, Bozkurt N, Erdem M, Erdem A, et al. Effect of luteal phase support after ovulation induction and intrauterineinsemination. Gynecol Endocrinol 2014; 7: 1-4.
8. Seckin B, Turkcapar F, Yildiz Y, Senturk B, Yilmaz N, GulermanC. Effect of luteal phase support with vaginal progesterone in intrauterineinsemination cycles with regard to follicular response: a prospective randomized study. J Reprod Med 2014; 59: 260-266.
9. Ebrahimi M, AkbariAsbagh F, Darvish S. The effect of luteal phase support on pregnancy rates of the stimulated intrauterine insemination cycles in couple with unexplained infertility. Fertil Steril 2010; 4: 51-56.
10. Druckmann R, Druckmann MA. Progestrone and immunology of pregnancy. J Sterid Biochem Mol Biol 2005; 97: 389-396. [DOI:10.1016/j.jsbmb.2005.08.010]
11. Check JH. Luteal phase support in assisted reproductive technology treatment: focus on Endometrin (progesterone) vaginal insert. Thr Clin Risk Manag 2009:5 403–407. [DOI:10.2147/TCRM.S4192]
12. Dmitrovic R, Vlaisavljevic V, Ivankovic D. Endometrial growth in early pregnancy after IVF/ET. J Assist Reprod Genet 2008; 25: 453-459. [DOI:10.1007/s10815-008-9260-z]
13. Tavaniotou A, Smitz J, Bourgain C, Devroey P. Comparison between different routes of progesterone administration as luteal phase support in infertility treatments. Hum Reprod Updat 2000,6: 139–148 [DOI:10.1093/humupd/6.2.139]
14. Salehpour S, Tamimi M, Saharkhiz N. Comparison of oral dydrogesterone with suppository vaginal progesterone for luteal-phase support in in vitro fertilization (IVF): A randomized clinical trial. Iran J Reprod Med 2013; 11: 913-918.
15. Maxson WS, Hargrove JT. Bioavailability of oral micronized progesterone. Fertil Steril 1985; 44: 622–626. [DOI:10.1016/S0015-0282(16)48977-6]
16. Zainul Rashid MR, Lim JF, Nawawi NH, Luqman M, Zolkeplai MF, Rangkuty HS, et al. A pilot study to determine whether progestogen supplementation using dydrogesterone during the first trimester will reduce the incidence of gestational hypertension in primigravidae.Gynecol Endocrinol 2014; 30: 217-220. [DOI:10.3109/09513590.2013.860960]
17. Allen NC, Herbert CM 3rd, Maxson WS, Rogers BJ, Diamond MP, Wentz AC. Intrauterine insemination: a critical review. Fertil Steril 1985; 44: 569–580. [DOI:10.1016/S0015-0282(16)48969-7]
18. Nuojua-Huttunen S, Tomas C, Bloigu R, Tuomivaara L, Martikainen H. Intrauterine insemination treatment in subfertility: an analysis of factors affecting outcome. Hum Reprod 1999; 14: 698–703. [DOI:10.1093/humrep/14.3.698]
19. Gezginc K, Gorkemli H, Celik C, Karatayli R, Ciçek MN, Olakoglu MC. Comparison of single versus double intrauterine insemination. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol 2008; 47: 57–61. [DOI:10.1016/S1028-4559(08)60055-8]
20. Demirol A, Gurgan T. Comparison of different gonadotrophin preparations in intrauterine insemination cycles for the treatment of unexplained infertility: a prospective, randomized study. Hum Reprod 2007; 22: 97–100. [DOI:10.1093/humrep/del335]
21. Freour T, Jean M, Mirallie S, Langlois ML, Dubourdieu S, Barriere P. Predictive value of CASA parameters in IUI with frozen donor sperm. Int J Androl 2009; 32: 498–504. [DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2605.2008.00886.x]
22. Yehia M. Luteal phase support in assisted reproduction. Middle East Fertility Society Journal 2007; 12: 158-167.
23. Tavaniotou, Devroey P. Effect of human chorionic gonadotropin on luteal luteinizing hormone concentrations in natural cycles. Fertil Steril 2003; 80: 654–655. [DOI:10.1016/S0015-0282(03)00789-1]
24. Nyboe AA, Popovic-Todorovic B, Schmidt KT, Loft A, Lindhard A, Hojgaard A, et al. Progesterone supplementation during early gestations after IVF or ICSI has no effect on the delivery rates: a randomized controlled trial. Hum Reprod 2002; 17: 357–361. [DOI:10.1093/humrep/17.2.357]
25. Jan EJ, Jee BC, Kim SD, Lee JR, Suh CS. Comparison of Oral Micronized Progesterone and Dydrogesterone as a Luteal Support in Intrauterine Insemination Cycle. Korean. J Reprod Med 2010; 37: 153-158.
26. Levine H, Watson N. Comparison of the pharmacokinetics of Crinone 8% administered vaginally versus Prometrium administered orally in postmenopausal women. Fertil Steril 2000; 73: 516-521. [DOI:10.1016/S0015-0282(99)00553-1]
27. Romero Nieto MI, Lorente González J, Arjona-Berral JE, Del Mu-oz-Villanueva M, Castelo-BrancoC. Luteal phase support with progesterone in intrauterineinsemination: a prospective randomized study. Gynecol Endocrinol 2014; 30: 197-201. [DOI:10.3109/09513590.2013.859242]
28. Hill MJ, Whitcomb BW, Lewis TD, Wu M, Terry N, DeCherney AH, et al. Progesterone luteal support after ovulation induction and intrauterineinsemination: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril 2013; 100: 1373-1380. [DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.06.034]
29. Fatemi HM, Bourgain C, Donoso P, Blockeel C, Papanikolaou EG, Popovic-Todorovic B, et al. Effect of oral administration of dydrogestrone versus vaginal administration of natural micronized progesterone on the secretory transformation of endometrium and luteal endocrine profile in patients with premature ovarian failure: a proof of concept Human Reprod 2007; 22: 1260-1263. [DOI:10.1093/humrep/del520]
30. Ganesh A, Chakravorty N, Mukherjee R, Goswami S, Chaudhury K, Chakravarty B. Comparison of oral dydrogestrone with progesterone gel and micronized progesterone for luteal support in 1,373 women undergoing in vitro fertilization: a randomized clinical study. Fertil Steril 2011; 95: 1961-1965. [DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.01.148]
31. Patki A, Pawar VC. Modulating fertility outcome in assisted reproductive technologies by the use of dydrogesterone. Gynecol Endocrinol 2007; 23: 68-72. [DOI:10.1080/09513590701584857]
32. Chakravarty BN, Shirazee HH, Dam P, Goswami SK, Chatterjee R, Ghosh S. Oral dydrogesterone versus intravaginalmicronised progesterone as luteal phase support in assisted reproductive technology (ART) cycles: results of a randomized study.J Steroid Biochem Mol Biol 2005; 97: 416-420. [DOI:10.1016/j.jsbmb.2005.08.012]
Send email to the article author

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb