Luteal phase support for in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection fresh cycles: a systematic review and network meta-analysis
Abstract Background Various luteal phase supports (LPSs) have been proven to increase the pregnancy rate in fresh cycles of in vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection; however, there is still significant debate regarding the optimal use of LPS. Methods A systematic review with the us...
Main Authors: | , , , , |
---|---|
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Published: |
BMC
2021-07-01
|
Series: | Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology |
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://doi.org/10.1186/s12958-021-00782-5 |
id |
doaj-34ff2053f9b84adc838443d46c4e926c |
---|---|
record_format |
Article |
spelling |
doaj-34ff2053f9b84adc838443d46c4e926c2021-07-11T11:47:16ZengBMCReproductive Biology and Endocrinology1477-78272021-07-0119111110.1186/s12958-021-00782-5Luteal phase support for in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection fresh cycles: a systematic review and network meta-analysisHanglin Wu0Songying Zhang1Xiaona Lin2Shasha Wang3Ping Zhou4Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, Hangzhou Women’s HospitalAssisted Reproduction Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, Zhejiang University School of MedicineAssisted Reproduction Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, Zhejiang University School of MedicineAssisted Reproduction Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, Zhejiang University School of MedicineAssisted Reproduction Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital, Zhejiang University School of MedicineAbstract Background Various luteal phase supports (LPSs) have been proven to increase the pregnancy rate in fresh cycles of in vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection; however, there is still significant debate regarding the optimal use of LPS. Methods A systematic review with the use of a network meta-analysis was performed via electronic searching of Ovid MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov and Google Scholar (up to January 2021) to compare the effectiveness and safety of various LPSs, as well as to evaluate the effects of different initiations of LPSs on pregnancy outcomes. The primary outcomes included live birth and ongoing pregnancy, with the results presented as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results Eighty-nine randomized controlled trials with 29,625 women comparing 14 interventions or placebo/no LPS treatments were included in the meta-analyses. No significant differences were found in terms of the pregnancy outcomes when LPS was started within 48 h after oocyte retrieval versus a delayed initiation between 48 h and 96 h after oocyte retrieval. The addition of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists to progesterone vaginal pessaries showed a significant benefit in terms of live birth (OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.78). Only human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG) was found to be more efficacious than the placebo/no LPS treatment in terms of live birth (OR 15.43, 95% CI 2.03 to 117.12, low evidence). Any active LPSs (except for rectal or subcutaneous progesterone) was significantly more efficacious than the placebo/no LPS treatment in terms of ongoing pregnancy, with ORs ranging between 1.77 (95% CI 1.08 to 2.90) for the vaginal progesterone pessary and 2.14 (1.23 to 3.70) for the intramuscular progesterone treatment. Among the comparisons of efficacy and tolerability between the active treatments, the differences were small and very uncertain. Conclusion Delays in progesterone supplementation until 96 h after oocyte retrieval does not affect pregnancy outcomes. The safety of GnRH agonists during the luteal phase needs to be evaluated in future studies before the applications of these agonists in clinical practice. With comparable efficacy and acceptability, there may be several viable clinical options for LPS.https://doi.org/10.1186/s12958-021-00782-5In vitro fertilizationIntracytoplasmic sperm injectionLuteal phase supportsPregnancy rateNetwork meta-analysis |
collection |
DOAJ |
language |
English |
format |
Article |
sources |
DOAJ |
author |
Hanglin Wu Songying Zhang Xiaona Lin Shasha Wang Ping Zhou |
spellingShingle |
Hanglin Wu Songying Zhang Xiaona Lin Shasha Wang Ping Zhou Luteal phase support for in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection fresh cycles: a systematic review and network meta-analysis Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology In vitro fertilization Intracytoplasmic sperm injection Luteal phase supports Pregnancy rate Network meta-analysis |
author_facet |
Hanglin Wu Songying Zhang Xiaona Lin Shasha Wang Ping Zhou |
author_sort |
Hanglin Wu |
title |
Luteal phase support for in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection fresh cycles: a systematic review and network meta-analysis |
title_short |
Luteal phase support for in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection fresh cycles: a systematic review and network meta-analysis |
title_full |
Luteal phase support for in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection fresh cycles: a systematic review and network meta-analysis |
title_fullStr |
Luteal phase support for in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection fresh cycles: a systematic review and network meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed |
Luteal phase support for in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection fresh cycles: a systematic review and network meta-analysis |
title_sort |
luteal phase support for in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection fresh cycles: a systematic review and network meta-analysis |
publisher |
BMC |
series |
Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology |
issn |
1477-7827 |
publishDate |
2021-07-01 |
description |
Abstract Background Various luteal phase supports (LPSs) have been proven to increase the pregnancy rate in fresh cycles of in vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection; however, there is still significant debate regarding the optimal use of LPS. Methods A systematic review with the use of a network meta-analysis was performed via electronic searching of Ovid MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, Embase, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials.gov and Google Scholar (up to January 2021) to compare the effectiveness and safety of various LPSs, as well as to evaluate the effects of different initiations of LPSs on pregnancy outcomes. The primary outcomes included live birth and ongoing pregnancy, with the results presented as odds ratios (ORs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results Eighty-nine randomized controlled trials with 29,625 women comparing 14 interventions or placebo/no LPS treatments were included in the meta-analyses. No significant differences were found in terms of the pregnancy outcomes when LPS was started within 48 h after oocyte retrieval versus a delayed initiation between 48 h and 96 h after oocyte retrieval. The addition of gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) agonists to progesterone vaginal pessaries showed a significant benefit in terms of live birth (OR 1.39, 95% CI 1.08 to 1.78). Only human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG) was found to be more efficacious than the placebo/no LPS treatment in terms of live birth (OR 15.43, 95% CI 2.03 to 117.12, low evidence). Any active LPSs (except for rectal or subcutaneous progesterone) was significantly more efficacious than the placebo/no LPS treatment in terms of ongoing pregnancy, with ORs ranging between 1.77 (95% CI 1.08 to 2.90) for the vaginal progesterone pessary and 2.14 (1.23 to 3.70) for the intramuscular progesterone treatment. Among the comparisons of efficacy and tolerability between the active treatments, the differences were small and very uncertain. Conclusion Delays in progesterone supplementation until 96 h after oocyte retrieval does not affect pregnancy outcomes. The safety of GnRH agonists during the luteal phase needs to be evaluated in future studies before the applications of these agonists in clinical practice. With comparable efficacy and acceptability, there may be several viable clinical options for LPS. |
topic |
In vitro fertilization Intracytoplasmic sperm injection Luteal phase supports Pregnancy rate Network meta-analysis |
url |
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12958-021-00782-5 |
work_keys_str_mv |
AT hanglinwu lutealphasesupportforinvitrofertilizationintracytoplasmicsperminjectionfreshcyclesasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT songyingzhang lutealphasesupportforinvitrofertilizationintracytoplasmicsperminjectionfreshcyclesasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT xiaonalin lutealphasesupportforinvitrofertilizationintracytoplasmicsperminjectionfreshcyclesasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT shashawang lutealphasesupportforinvitrofertilizationintracytoplasmicsperminjectionfreshcyclesasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis AT pingzhou lutealphasesupportforinvitrofertilizationintracytoplasmicsperminjectionfreshcyclesasystematicreviewandnetworkmetaanalysis |
_version_ |
1721308658214633472 |