ArticleScientific reports2024
In vitro fertilization results of GNRH antagonists and medroxyprogesterone acetate used to prevent premature LH surge during ovarian hyperstimulation.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of medroxyprogesterone acetate (MPA) treatment in comparison to those of gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonists for the prevention of premature luteinizing hormone surges during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (OS) and the impact of these effects on developing embryos and pregnancy outcomes. Data from 757 cycles of GnRH antagonist treatment and 756 cycles of MPA treatment were evaluated at the Akdeniz University Faculty of Medicine Assisted Reproductive Treatment Center between October 2018 and April 2022. Patient records were obtained from the electronic database of the centre and analysed. In our centre, GnRH antagonist protocols were used between 2018 and 2020, and MPA protocols were used between 2020 and 2022. We chose our study population by year. Our study is a comparative retrospective study. All methods in this study were performed in accordance with the relevant guidelines and regulations. Patients using MPA were significantly older (33.9 ± 5.6 vs. 32.6 ± 5.6, p < 0.001) and had a lower number of antral follicles (AFC) (10.7 ± 8.6 vs. 11.9 ± 10.8, p = 0.007) than those using GnRH antagonists. Both MPA (2.9%) and GnRH antagonists (2.2%) had similar effectiveness in preventing premature ovulation (p = 0.415). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of the number of total developed embryos (1.3 ± 1.3 vs. 1.2 ± 1.2, p = 0.765). There was no significant difference in the clinical pregnancy rates with the first ET (%35.4 vs. %30.1, p = 0.074), per total number of transfers (35.3% vs. 30.1%, p = 0.077). MPA was found to be effective at preventing premature ovulation during OS treatment, and the incidence of developing embryo and pregnancy outcomes in patients using MPA were similar to those in patients using GnRH antagonists. Therefore, the use of MPA instead of GnRH antagonists during OS may be a viable alternative for patients not scheduled for fresh ET.
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.