Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31209815›Full record

ArticleCurrent medical science2019

Flexible GnRH Antagonist Protocol versus Progestin-primed Ovarian Stimulation (PPOS) Protocol in Patients with Polycystic Ovary Syndrome: Comparison of Clinical Outcomes and Ovarian Response.

Zhuo-Ni Xiao, Jia-Li Peng, Jing Yang, Wang-Ming Xu

Registry-linked trialAbstract readComparative Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Current medical science, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT06637189 (Protocol with Progestin-primed Ovarian Stimulation), which is not on this map. Cited by 25 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
4.6field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

NCT06637189 phase4not yet recruitingnot on this mapstarted 2024, after this paper: background citation

Protocol with Progestin-primed Ovarian Stimulation (PPOS) from the Beginning of Stimulation Versus Protocol with GnRH Antagonists for Ovarian Stimulation in Patients Undergoing DUOSTIM with Embryo Accumulation for PGT-A.

TypeinterventionalSponsorGinefivRan2024 to 2025Enrolled144ConditionsStimulation in the Ovary, Embryo, Oocyte, Oocyte RetrievalArmsGanirelix, Medroxyprogesterone Acetate 10 MG
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

25 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 47 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Zhuo-Ni XiaoCenter for Reproductive Medicine, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430060, China. RM001111@whu.edu.cn.
Jia-Li PengCenter for Reproductive Medicine, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430060, China.
Jing YangCenter for Reproductive Medicine, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430060, China.
Wang-Ming XuCenter for Reproductive Medicine, Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University, Wuhan, 430060, China.
Renmin Hospital of Wuhan University · CNWuhan University · CN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) is one of the most common causes of infertility in women. Progestin-primed ovarian stimulation (PPOS) protocol, which used oral progestin to prevent premature luteinizing hormone (LH) surges in ovarian stimulation, has been proved to be effective and safe in patients with PCOS. The aim of the present study was to compare the efficacy of PPOS protocol with that of the traditional gonadotropin-releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist protocol in patients with PCOS. A total of 157 patients undergoing in-vitro fertilization (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) were recruited into this study. The patients were divided into two groups by the stimulation protocols: the GnRH antagonist protocol group and the PPOS protocol group. There was no significant difference in the clinical characteristics between the two groups. Dose and duration of gonadotropin were higher in the PPOS protocol group. Estradiol levels on the day of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) administration were significantly lower in the PPOS protocol group. Fertilization rates and the number of good quality embryos were similar between the two groups. Remarkably, we found 6 patients with moderate ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) in the GnRH antagonist protocol group but 0 in the PPOS protocol group. A total of 127 women completed their frozen embryo transfer (FET) cycles. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of clinical pregnancy rate per transfer, implantation rate, first-trimester miscarriage rate and on-going pregnancy rate per transfer. To conclude, PPOS protocol decreased the incidence of OHSS without adversely affecting clinical outcomes in patients with PCOS.

Indexed as

AdultChorionic GonadotropinEmbryo TransferEstradiolFemaleFertility Agents, FemaleFertilization in VitroGene ExpressionGonadotropin-Releasing HormoneHormone AntagonistsHumansInfertility, FemaleMaleOvarian Hyperstimulation SyndromeOvaryOvulation InductioncetrorelixChorionic GonadotropinEstradiolFertility Agents, FemaleGonadotropin-Releasing HormoneHormone AntagonistsProgestinscontrolled ovarian hyperstimulationGnRH antagonist protocolovarian hyperstimulation syndromepolycystic ovary syndromeprogestin-primed ovarian stimulation

Identifiers

PMID31209815
OpenAlexW2951166409

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

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.