4.6 Article

Examining the evidence: progesterone supplementation during fresh and frozen embryo transfer

Journal

REPRODUCTIVE BIOMEDICINE ONLINE
Volume 29, Issue -, Pages S4-S14

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S1472-6483(14)50063-6

Keywords

frozen embryo transfer; implantation; in vitro fertilization; progesterone supplementation; timing

Funding

  1. Actavis
  2. Merck

Ask authors/readers for more resources

ART has evolved over time and frozen-thawed embryo transfer (FET) is now a frequently performed, successful option. During the last decade, cryopreservation techniques have received considerable interest, whereas interest in the priming and preparation of the endometrium prior to and after embryo transfer was more limited. The available evidence for the rationale and timing of progesterone supplementation as well as an understanding of the differences among progesterone formulations with respect to efficacy, optimum use, and patient preference is worth examining. A Summit was convened to review the literature on progesterone supplementation in ART and after FET and to provide guidance on the most clinically relevant issues. Utilizing an innovative consensus-building model to examine the evidence, Summit faculty drafted summit statements prior to the meeting, completed a literature search, and created a presentation based on this. At the conclusion of their discussion the faculty developed final summit statements, evaluating the strength of the evidence supporting each statement, and rating their level of support for each statement. The clinically relevant topic areas were the rationale for progesterone supplementation, timing and appropriate dosing, whether progesterone serum levels reflect outcomes, and distinguishing among progesterone formulations with respect to efficacy, tolerability, and patient preference/satisfaction. (C) 2014 Reproductive Healthcare Ltd. Published by Elsevier Ltd. Allrights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available