Observational studyMedicine2018
Comparison of neonatal outcomes and live-birth defects after progestin-primed ovarian stimulation versus conventional ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: A large retrospective cohort study.
Observational study in Medicine, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 14 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
14 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 27 citations in OpenAlex.
- Efficacy of progestin-primed ovarian stimulation in women with polycystic ovary syndrome undergoingFrontiers in endocrinology · 2023Pooled it
- Effectiveness of progesterone-primed ovarian stimulation in assisted reproductive technology: a systematic review and meta-analysis.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2021Pooled it
- Comparison of progesterone protocol versus gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist protocol in terms of preventing premature LH surge and assisted reproductive technology outcome in infertile women: a randomized controlled trial.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2024Trial
- Medroxyprogesterone Acetate versus Gonadotropin-Releasing Hormone Antagonist for the Prevention of Premature Luteinizing Hormone Surge in hyper-responder women undergoing controlled ovarian stimulation for IVF/ICSI Cycles.JBRA assisted reproduction · 2023Trial
- Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation protocol in patients undergoing assisted reproductive technology.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2025Review
- Serum concentrations of medroxyprogesterone acetate were undetectable on OPU+5 days and had no effect on the serum progesterone level in patients undergoing the progestin-primed ovarian stimulation protocol.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Article
- Comparison of fixed and flexible progestin-primed ovarian stimulation in women classified in patient-oriented strategies encompassing individualized oocyte number (POSEIDON) group 4.Archives of gynecology and obstetrics · 2024Article
- Article
- The cumulative live birth rates of 18 593 women with progestin-primed ovarian stimulation-related protocols and frozen-thawed transfer cycles.Human reproduction open · 2024Article
- Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation with letrozole using different doses of medroxyprogesterone acetate per day: a retrospective cohort study.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2024Article
- Comparison of the neonatal outcomes of progestin-primed ovarian stimulation and flexible GnRH antagonist protocols: a propensity score-matched cohort study.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2023Article
- Neonatal outcomes and congenital malformations in children born after progestin-primed ovarian stimulation protocol.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2022Article
- Flexible GnRH Antagonist Protocol versus Progestin-primed Ovarian Stimulation (PPOS) Protocol in Patients with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome: Comparison of Clinical Outcomes and Ovarian Response.Current medical science · 2019Article
- Neonatal outcomes and congenital malformations in children born after dydrogesterone application in progestin-primed ovarian stimulation protocol for IVF: a retrospective cohort study.Drug design, development and therapy · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) is a new ovarian stimulation regimen for in vitro fertilization (IVF), with the advantages of an oral administration route and more control over preovulatory luteinizing hormone (LH) levels. Assessing the safety of this novel regimen is an important premise for its routine practice.We conducted a large retrospective cohort study for infants born between August 2014 and April 2017 from IVF and embryo transfer cycles after either PPOS and the conventional gonadotropin-releasing hormone-agonist (GnRH-a) short protocol at our center. Around 1589 live-born infants were finally enrolled, corresponding to 1258 frozen-thawed (FET) cycles, which led to 855 live-born infants from PPOS (659 FET cycles) and 734 live-born infants from the short protocol (599 FET cycles).Birth characteristics regarding gestational age, birth weight and length, infant sex, and early neonatal death were comparable between the 2 groups. The incidence of live-birth defects in the PPOS group (1.52%) was similar to that in the short protocol group (1.63%) and was not statistically significant. For birth defects, the risk significantly increased for multiple births, and the adjusted odds ratio was 3.14 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.25-7.88). No associations were found between congenital birth defects and maternal age, body mass index (BMI), the duration of infertility, method of insemination, infant sex, embryo stage at transfer, the number of embryos transferred or ovarian stimulation regimen.Our study shows that the neonatal outcomes and risk of congenital malformations were similar between the PPOS and conventional GnRH-a short protocol. However, multiple pregnancy led to a higher likelihood of birth defects.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.