Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37186265›Full record

Trial reportArchives of gynecology and obstetrics2023

Comparison of pregnancy rates in antagonist cycles after luteal support with GnRH-agonist versus progesterone: prospective randomized study.

Eadit Buhbut, Rinad Nabulsi, Gilad Avigdor, Ido Ben-Ami

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Archives of gynecology and obstetrics, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05484193 (Comparison of Pregnancy Rates After Luteal Phase Support With GnRH Agonist Versus Progesterone - a Prospective Randomized Study), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact, top 84% 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.

NCT05484193 naunknown statusnot on this map

Comparison of Pregnancy Rates After Luteal Phase Support With GnRH Agonist Versus Progesterone - a Prospective Randomized Study

TypeinterventionalSponsorShaare Zedek Medical CenterRan2020 to 2023Enrolled150ConditionsUse of GnRH Agonist Alone for Luteal Phase Support in Fresh IVF CyclesArmsGnRH agonist, Progesterone
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed, 0 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. The Trigger in IVF Cycles: Molecular Pathways and Clinical Implications.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  2. 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 1 institution in 1 country.

Eadit Buhbut *IVF and Infertility Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Shaare Zedek Medical Center, Jerusalem, affiliated with the Faculty of Medicine, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Shmu'el Bait St 12, 9103102, Jerusalem, Israel. eaditbu@szmc.org.il.ORCID 0000-0001-5921-1185
Rinad Nabulsi *IVF and Infertility Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Shaare Zedek Medical Center, Jerusalem, affiliated with the Faculty of Medicine, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Shmu'el Bait St 12, 9103102, Jerusalem, Israel.
Gilad AvigdorIVF and Infertility Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Shaare Zedek Medical Center, Jerusalem, affiliated with the Faculty of Medicine, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Shmu'el Bait St 12, 9103102, Jerusalem, Israel.
Ido Ben-AmiIVF and Infertility Unit, Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Shaare Zedek Medical Center, Jerusalem, affiliated with the Faculty of Medicine, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Shmu'el Bait St 12, 9103102, Jerusalem, Israel.
Hebrew University of Jerusalem · IL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo compare pregnancy rates in GnRH-antagonist cycles triggered with hCG after luteal phase support with intranasal GnRH-agonist as sole luteal phase support versus standard vaginal progesterone preparation.

methodsProspective randomized controlled study of patients who underwent antagonist-based IVF cycles triggered with hCG at university-affiliated tertiary medical center between 2020 and 2022. Patients meeting the inclusion criteria were randomly assigned to either intranasal GnRH-agonist or vaginal progesterone for luteal phase support. Pregnancy rates were the main outcome compared between the two study groups.

resultsA total of 150 patients underwent 164 cycles, 127 cycles of which were included in the study cohort. Of them, 64 (50.4%) and 63 (49.6%) cycles were treated with GnRH-agonist or progesterone, respectively, as sole luteal phase support. A significantly higher pregnancy rate was demonstrated in the GnRH-agonist group compared with the progesterone group. After adjustment of several potential confounders such as age, body mass index, past obstetric history, number of IVF cycles, oocyte retrieved and embryos transferred, GnRH-agonist was still associated with a higher pregnancy rate (odds ratio 3.4, 95% confidence interval 1.4-8.3). Ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome rates were similar between the groups.

conclusionsThis prospective study suggests that nasal GnRH-agonist for luteal phase support is associated with higher pregnancy rates compared with standard progesterone support in an antagonist-based protocol triggered with hCG, while maintaining a similar safety profile.

trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov NCT05484193. Date of registration: August 02 2022. The trial was retrospectively registered.

Indexed as

Fertilization in VitroProgesteroneChorionic GonadotropinFemaleGonadotropin-Releasing HormoneHumansLuteal PhaseOvulation InductionPregnancyPregnancy RateProspective StudiesChorionic GonadotropinGonadotropin-Releasing HormoneProgesteroneARTGnRH-agonistIVFLuteal phase supportPregnancy rate

Identifiers

PMID37186265
OpenAlexW4366981210

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.