Journal
JOURNAL OF ASSISTED REPRODUCTION AND GENETICS
Volume 37, Issue 5, Pages 1203-1212Publisher
SPRINGER/PLENUM PUBLISHERS
DOI: 10.1007/s10815-020-01755-0
Keywords
Progesterone; Congenital malformations; In vitro fertilization; Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Objectives To compare progestin ovarian stimulation protocols with gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogue (agonists and antagonists) protocols on newborn outcomes. Methods The PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and BioMed Central databases were searched for studies comparing progestin prime ovarian stimulation (PPOS) protocols with gonadotropin-releasing hormone analogues. Data were pooled by meta-analysis using a random effects model. Main outcome measures Primary endpoint was the risk of newborn congenital malformations. Results A total of 4 studies involving 9274 live-born infants were included. No important harm was observed with PPOS in terms of congenital malformations (OR 0.92; 95% CI 0.63-1.34; p = 0.65) (very low quality of evidence (QOE)) and low birth weight (OR 1.06; 95% CI 0.95-1.18; p = 0.29) (very low QOE) as compared with GnRH-a short protocols. In addition, a trend to a lower risk of preterm birth (OR 0.90; 95% CI 0.80-1.02; p = 0.10) (very low QOE) was found among patients treated with a PPOS protocol. Conclusions PPOS protocols, compared with GnRH-a protocols, are associated with a similar congenital malformation risk profile. Therefore, PPOS might represent a safe and appealing treatment option for infertile patients.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available