Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34609115›Full record

ArticleJBRA assisted reproduction2022

Progestin-Primed Ovarian Stimulation is a non-inferior alternative to the GnRH Antagonist Protocol in patients undergoing assisted reproductive techniques: a retrospective study.

João Pedro Junqueira Caetano, Luciana Campomizzi Calazans, Leci Veiga Caetano Amorim, Leonardo Matheus Ribeiro Pereira, Erica Becker Sousa Xavier, Ana Luisa Menezes Campos, Bruna Barbosa Coimbra, Ricardo Mello Marinho

Open access · bronzeAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in JBRA assisted reproduction, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
0.6field-weighted citation impact, top 29% 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.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. 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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

João Pedro Junqueira CaetanoPro-Criar Reproductive Medicine Center (Eugin Group), Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.
Luciana Campomizzi CalazansPro-Criar Reproductive Medicine Center (Eugin Group), Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.
Leci Veiga Caetano AmorimPro-Criar Reproductive Medicine Center (Eugin Group), Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.
Leonardo Matheus Ribeiro PereiraPro-Criar Reproductive Medicine Center (Eugin Group), Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.
Erica Becker Sousa XavierPro-Criar Reproductive Medicine Center (Eugin Group), Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.
Ana Luisa Menezes CamposPro-Criar Reproductive Medicine Center (Eugin Group), Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.
Bruna Barbosa CoimbraHospital das Clínicas - Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais, Medical Residency, Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.
Ricardo Mello MarinhoPro-Criar Reproductive Medicine Center (Eugin Group), Belo Horizonte, MG, Brazil.
Faculdade de Ciências Médicas de Minas Gerais · BRHospital das Clínicas da Universidade Federal de Minas Gerais · BR

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveTo demonstrate the non-inferiority of Clinical Pregnancy Rates from Progestin-Primed Ovarian Stimulation compared to the GnRH Antagonist Protocol when the freeze-all and blastocyst transfer strategy is applied.

methodsA retrospective study included all IVF cycles performed at Pró-Criar Reproductive Medicine Center, Belo Horizonte, Minas Gerais, Brazil, between May 2018 and May 2019 using a GnRH antagonist analogue or oral progestins to block the LH peak in IVF/intra-cytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) cycles for infertility treatment.

resultsThe primary outcome of our study was Clinical Pregnancy Rate at the first ET (Blastocyst), which were 58.4% in the progestin group and 54.9% in the antagonist group (p=0.735), a finding consistent with most studies published to date using different progestins. The mean number of retrieved oocytes was 11 in the antagonist group and 9 oocytes in the progestin group (p=0.009). The fertilization rate was 80% for both groups (p=0.935). The rate of blastocyst formation per cycle was 50% in the antagonist group and 55.6% in the progestin group (p=0.106). The stimulation lasted a mean of 10 days in the two groups (p=0.403) and did not vary with patient age in either group. The gonadotropin dose used was higher in the antagonist group (2025 IU) than in the progestin group (1950 IU) (p=0.057). In addition, the blockade was effective: there was only one case of spontaneous ovulation, which corresponded to less than 1% of the cycles.

conclusionsProgestin-Primed Ovarian Stimulation is a non-inferior alternative to the GnRH Antagonist Protocol in patients undergoing assisted reproductive techniques. An incidence compatible with the 0.34 to 8% risk described in the literature for failure to control the premature LH surge in antagonist protocol cycles.

Indexed as

Fertilization in VitroProgestinsFemaleGonadotropin-Releasing HormoneHumansOvulation InductionPregnancyRetrospective StudiesGonadotropin-Releasing HormoneProgestinsassistedin vitro fertilizationovulation inductionpregnancy rateprogestinreproductive techniques

Identifiers

PMID34609115
PMCPMC8769185
OpenAlexW3203833248

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.